## Facts

- A Peruvian seaman signed Peruvian shipping articles in Peru to serve on a Peruvian-flag cargo vessel owned by a Peruvian shipping company, under a Peruvian collective bargaining agreement.
- The employment arrangement provided that disputes arising from employment-related torts were to be resolved in Peruvian courts under Peruvian law.
- The shipowner maintained no U.S. offices or general agents; its U.S. contacts were limited to port calls.
- The seaman was killed while serving aboard the vessel when it was in Port Arthur, Texas.
- The seaman’s mother, a Peruvian citizen and resident, filed a wrongful-death action in federal court in Texas under the Jones Act and general maritime law.
- The district court denied dismissal on forum non conveniens grounds, proceeded quickly to trial, and entered judgment for the plaintiff; the defendants appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the district court abused its discretion by refusing to dismiss the action on forum non conveniens grounds in favor of a Peruvian forum.
2. Whether U.S. law (Jones Act/general maritime law) or Peruvian law governed the wrongful-death claim arising from a Peruvian seaman’s death on a Peruvian vessel owned and operated under Peruvian employment arrangements.

## Decision

- The Fifth Circuit reversed the judgment for the plaintiff.
- The court held the district court abused its discretion by retaining the case and denying dismissal for forum non conveniens.
- The case was remanded with instructions to dismiss in favor of a Peruvian forum, subject to the usual conditions ensuring the availability of that forum and the defendant’s submission to jurisdiction there.
- The court concluded that Peruvian law, not U.S. law, was the appropriate governing law on these facts.

## Legal Principles

- Forum non conveniens in maritime cases follows the same private- and public-interest balancing applied in other civil cases; there is no separate, more plaintiff-favorable maritime analysis.
- A district court abuses its discretion when it gives undue weight to the situs of injury and plaintiff’s forum choice despite overwhelmingly foreign parties, evidence, and governing law.
- Private-interest factors favor dismissal where key witnesses and documents are abroad, the operative employment contract and regulatory regime are foreign, and foreign discovery and judgment enforcement in the U.S. would be difficult.
- Public-interest factors favor dismissal where the local U.S. interest is limited, court administration burdens are high, and foreign law would predominate.
- Choice-of-law analysis in maritime wrongful-death disputes may point to foreign law when the vessel’s flag, the parties’ citizenship and residence, the home port, and the employment relationship are all foreign.

## Conclusion

Because the dispute was centered in Peru—by parties, vessel, employment contract, expected forum, and governing law—the Fifth Circuit held that Peru was the substantially more convenient forum and that the district court’s refusal to dismiss for forum non conveniens required reversal and dismissal in favor of litigation in Peru.


Gonzalez v. Naviera Neptuno A.A., 832 F.2d 876 (5th Cir. 1987)