## Facts

- Canadian Aviator, Ltd., owner of the steamship *Cavelier*, sued the United States in admiralty under the Public Vessels Act of 1925 for vessel damage allegedly attributable to a U.S. Navy patrol boat, YP-249.
- During World War II, the *Cavelier* sailed under U.S. naval convoy direction, and YP-249 was assigned to pilot the *Cavelier* into Delaware Bay.
- Naval personnel directed the *Cavelier* to proceed “directly astern” of YP-249.
- While following those orders, the *Cavelier* struck a submerged wreck and was damaged.
- The libel alleged the wreck was known or should have been known to naval authorities, and that YP-249’s crew negligently navigated and failed to warn the *Cavelier*, causing the accident.
- The district court dismissed for failure to state a claim, reasoning the damage was not “caused by a public vessel” because there was no physical impact by YP-249; the court of appeals affirmed.

## Issues

1. Whether “damages caused by a public vessel” under the Public Vessels Act includes damage resulting from negligent navigation, control, or orders by a public vessel’s personnel when the public vessel did not physically strike the claimant’s ship.

## Decision

- Reversed and remanded.
- The libel stated a cause of action under the Public Vessels Act.
- “Caused by a public vessel” is not limited to situations where the public vessel is the direct physical instrument of the damage.
- Damage resulting from negligence of personnel in the operation of the public vessel falls within the Act, including where the public vessel directs another vessel’s movements into danger.
- Although the Act authorizes an in personam suit and denies a maritime lien, courts may apply admiralty principles associated with both in rem and in personam liability to determine causation and fault.

## Legal Principles

- Under the Public Vessels Act, recoverable “damages caused by a public vessel” include harm proximately resulting from negligent operation of the vessel by its crew, even absent collision or direct contact.
- The statute permits application of general maritime law concepts of navigation responsibility and causation in defining the United States’ liability, notwithstanding the absence of an in rem arrest or maritime lien.
- A pleading sufficiently states a claim when it alleges that a claimant vessel, acting under orders to follow a public vessel, suffered damage from a hazard due solely to negligent navigation or failure to warn by the public vessel’s personnel.

## Conclusion

The Court held that the Public Vessels Act reaches damage proximately caused by negligent navigation and operational direction by a U.S. public vessel’s crew, even when the public vessel did not physically inflict the damage, and therefore the claim should proceed on the merits.


Canadian Aviator, Ltd. v. United States, 324 U.S. 215 (1945)