In shipping disputes, one of the most commercially important questions is not whether a claim exists, but where that claim sits in the payment queue. If a vessel is arrested, sold by court order, or otherwise turned into a fund for creditors, the central issue becomes priority: who gets paid first, who gets paid later, and who may recover nothing at all. That is the practical world of maritime liens and priority of claims. It matters to shipowners, crew, cargo interests, salvors, mortgage banks, repair yards, bunker suppliers, port authorities, P&I insurers, and buyers considering distressed vessel acquisitions.
A maritime lien is not just another unsecured debt. Under the 1993 International Convention on Maritime Liens and Mortgages, certain claims attach to the vessel itself, follow the vessel despite a change of ownership, registration, or flag, and rank ahead of registered mortgages. The Convention entered into force on 5 September 2004 and currently has 21 parties according to the UN Treaty Collection. That international model is not universal in every detail, but it is one of the most important modern reference points for understanding maritime priority rules.
The short commercial answer to “who gets paid first?” is this: court and arrest expenses usually come first; true maritime liens usually come next; registered ship mortgages often come after those liens; other statutory or contractual claims usually come later; and the owner receives only what remains, if anything remains at all. But that short answer hides crucial differences between systems. The 1993 Convention sets one core model, U.S. law uses its own framework for preferred maritime liens and preferred mortgages, and Turkish law adopts a structure broadly aligned with the 1993 Convention while also preserving some specifically Turkish rules, including a special place for general average contribution claims and public wreck-removal costs.
What Is a Maritime Lien?
Under the 1993 Convention, a maritime lien is a privileged claim that secures one of a limited number of specified claims against the owner, demise charterer, manager, or operator of the vessel. The Convention’s listed claims are crew wages and related repatriation/social insurance amounts; loss of life or personal injury directly connected with the vessel’s operation; salvage reward; port, canal, waterway, and pilotage dues; and tort claims for physical loss or damage caused by operation of the vessel, excluding cargo, containers, and passengers’ effects carried on board. The Convention also provides that these liens follow the vessel notwithstanding any change of ownership, registration, or flag.
That last point is why maritime liens are so powerful. In ordinary commercial law, selling the asset often changes the risk picture for creditors. In maritime law, a true maritime lien can remain attached to the ship even after the vessel changes hands, at least until a valid forced sale cuts off prior encumbrances and transfers them to the sale proceeds. This is one reason why ship buyers, lenders, and insurers treat lien analysis as a core due-diligence issue rather than a secondary litigation detail.
Maritime Liens Are Not the Same as Mortgages or Ordinary Maritime Claims
A frequent commercial mistake is to assume that every maritime claim creates a maritime lien. That is not true. The 1993 Convention distinguishes between maritime liens, registered mortgages/hypotheques/charges, and any additional national-law liens a state may choose to create. Under Article 6, states may grant other maritime liens, but if they do, those extra liens must rank after the Convention’s core maritime liens and also after compliant registered mortgages. In other words, the law treats the core maritime lien claims as a special class, and not every ship-related debt joins that class.
This distinction is central to the payment question. A bank with a properly registered mortgage has a strong security right, but that mortgage may still rank behind core maritime liens. A repair yard or supplier may have a maritime claim in the everyday sense, yet not enjoy the same super-priority as crew wages or salvage. Priority analysis therefore begins with classification: what kind of claim is this exactly? Until that question is answered correctly, the ranking analysis is often premature.
The International Priority Model Under the 1993 Convention
The 1993 Convention provides a relatively clear general hierarchy. First, the maritime liens listed in Article 4 take priority over registered mortgages, hypotheques, and charges. Second, among the Article 4 liens themselves, they rank in the order listed, subject to two important refinements: salvage liens rank ahead of all earlier maritime liens, and salvage liens rank among themselves in reverse chronological order by completion of the salvage operations. The Convention also states that crew, personal injury, port/pilotage dues, and tort physical-damage claims rank pari passu within their respective listed classes.
That means the international model is not simply “all liens first, all mortgages second.” It is more refined. A salvage claim can leapfrog earlier liens because the law wants to reward and incentivize successful rescue operations. Crew wage and injury-type claims receive strong protection, but where several claims exist within the same protected class, they may share equally rather than by first-in-time filing. This is one reason maritime priority law looks very different from many land-based secured-transactions systems.
The Convention also imposes time limits. The core Article 4 maritime liens generally expire after one year unless the vessel has been arrested or seized before then and that arrest or seizure leads to a forced sale. For crew-wage liens, the one-year clock runs from the seafarer’s discharge from the vessel; for the other listed categories, it runs from the date the secured claim arises. That structure reflects a policy choice: maritime liens are powerful, but they are not meant to remain indefinitely alive in the background.
What Happens in a Forced Sale?
A forced sale is usually where priority rules become economically real. Under Article 12 of the 1993 Convention, when a vessel is validly sold by judicial or other forced-sale process in a State Party, all registered mortgages and all liens and encumbrances cease to attach to the vessel, provided the sale satisfies the Convention’s conditions. The vessel is then sold free and clear, and the claims move from the ship to the proceeds of sale.
Before ordinary ranking starts, however, the Convention gives a special place to arrest and sale expenses. Article 12 provides that the costs and expenses arising out of the arrest or seizure and the subsequent sale are paid first from the sale proceeds. Those costs expressly include upkeep of the vessel and crew and also certain wage-related items accruing from the time of arrest or seizure. Only the remaining balance is distributed according to the normal ranking rules.
This is why, in practice, the ranking ladder often looks like this:
- Arrest, custody, upkeep, and sale expenses.
- Core maritime liens.
- Registered ship mortgages and similar registered security rights.
- Any lower-ranking national-law liens or retention rights recognized by the applicable law.
- Residual claims and, last, any surplus to the owner.
That hierarchy is the commercial answer many lenders and claimants care about most. It also explains why a bank can hold a mortgage that looks strong on paper but still recover less than expected if the vessel has large crew, salvage, or port-dues exposure and the arrest process itself has generated major costs.
U.S. Law: Similar Logic, Different Structure
U.S. law illustrates how the exact ranking can shift by jurisdiction. Under Title 46 of the U.S. Code, a “preferred maritime lien” includes liens arising before a preferred mortgage was filed, and also certain special categories including maritime tort damage, directly employed stevedore wages, crew wages, general average, and salvage. A preferred mortgage is itself a lien on the mortgaged vessel, but in a judicial sale its priority is expressly subordinate to court costs and preferred maritime liens.
The U.S. Code further provides that when a vessel is sold by court order in an in rem action, all claims existing against the vessel are terminated and attach to the sale proceeds in their existing order of priority. For most vessels, the preferred mortgage lien outranks other claims except court expenses and preferred maritime liens. For certain foreign vessels, however, a preferred mortgage may also be subordinate to a maritime lien for necessaries provided in the United States. That is a good example of why the practical answer to “who gets paid first?” always depends on the governing law and the status of the vessel.
U.S. law therefore shares the broad maritime logic of privileged claims outranking mortgages, but the statutory categories are framed differently from the 1993 Convention model. A U.S. practitioner asks whether a claim is a preferred maritime lien, whether the mortgage is a preferred mortgage, whether the vessel is domestic or foreign for the relevant purpose, and whether necessaries were provided in the United States. That is a different doctrinal vocabulary from the Convention model, even where the commercial issue is still the same.
Turkish Law: Broadly Convention-Oriented, but With Important Particularities
Turkish law gives a very useful example for international readers because the Turkish Commercial Code adopts a system closely aligned with the 1993 Convention’s structure while also adding some distinct national choices. Article 1320 of the Turkish Commercial Code lists the claims that give rise to a gemi alacaklısı hakkı: crew wages and related sums including repatriation and social insurance contributions; death or bodily injury directly connected with operation of the ship; salvage reward; port, canal, waterway, quarantine, and pilotage dues; tort claims for physical loss or damage caused by operation of the ship, excluding cargo, containers, and passengers’ effects; and, importantly, general average contribution claims. The Code also states that whether a claim asserted in Turkish judicial proceedings gives rise to a maritime lien is determined by Turkish law.
That final Turkish category is notable. Under the 1993 Convention, general average is not one of the core Article 4 maritime liens. Turkish law, however, expressly includes müşterek avarya garame payı alacakları within Article 1320(1)(f). This makes Turkish law especially important for claimants who want to know whether a general average contribution claim receives lien protection, because the answer in Turkey is yes—but not at the same priority level as the first five categories.
Article 1323 of the Turkish Commercial Code provides the decisive ranking rule. The maritime liens arising from Article 1320(1)(a) through (e)—that is, crew wages, personal injury, salvage, port/pilotage dues, and qualifying tort physical-damage claims—rank ahead of all registered or unregistered statutory and contractual security rights and real burdens on the ship. By contrast, the maritime lien for general average contribution under Article 1320(1)(f) ranks after all those statutory and contractual security rights. Turkish law also provides that where a stranded or sunken ship is removed by public authorities for navigational safety or environmental protection, the costs of that removal are paid ahead of all maritime claims.
This is a striking and highly practical Turkish solution. It means that a general average contribution claim is protected by lien status in Turkey, but it does not leap ahead of mortgages and other real security in the way the first five lien categories do. It also means public wreck-removal costs can rise to the very top of the distribution ladder. For claimants and lenders alike, that can materially change recoveries in a Turkish forced-sale scenario.
Ranking Within Turkish Maritime Liens
Article 1324 of the Turkish Commercial Code then refines the internal order of Turkish maritime liens. As a rule, the order follows the order of the claims listed in Article 1320, subject to the special lower rank of general average under Article 1323(2). Salvage enjoys a special super-priority: the lien for salvage reward ranks ahead of all other liens that arose before the salvage operations giving rise to that reward, and salvage liens rank among themselves in reverse chronological order by the date each salvage operation ended. The Code also provides that the claims listed in Article 1320(1)(a), (b), (d), and (e) rank equally among themselves.
This makes Turkish law quite sophisticated. It does not merely say “maritime liens outrank mortgages.” It distinguishes between top-tier maritime liens and the separately treated general average lien, gives salvage a strong incentive-based priority, and then equalizes certain non-salvage claim classes among themselves. For anyone litigating or financing against a vessel in Turkey, those distinctions are essential.
Turkish Time Limits: Another Priority Trap
Priority is not just about ranking; it is also about survival. Under Article 1326 of the Turkish Commercial Code, the maritime liens corresponding to Article 1320(1)(a) through (e) expire one year after the claim arises, unless before then the ship is arrested and sold by judicial enforcement. For crew claims, the period runs from the claimant’s departure from the vessel; for the other categories, it runs from the date the secured claim arose. The general average contribution lien in Article 1320(1)(f) is different: it expires after six months from the vessel’s arrival at the destination where the damage and apportionment are to be determined, or, if the vessel never arrives there, from the port where the voyage ends, unless the ship has been arrested in a way leading to forced sale; and in a bona fide sale to a third party, it also expires sixty days after the buyer registers title, with the first-expiring period controlling.
That timing structure matters because a high-ranking claim that has expired is no longer a high-ranking claim. Creditors sometimes focus so intensely on the priority label that they forget the extinction clock. In Turkish practice, especially, the shorter life of the general average contribution lien can become outcome-determinative.
So Who Actually Gets Paid First?
The most accurate answer is that priority is layered. In a typical forced sale under the Convention model, the first money goes to arrest, custody, crew-upkeep, and sale expenses. Then the Convention maritime liens are paid, with salvage enjoying super-priority over earlier liens and certain non-salvage categories sharing pari passu. Registered mortgages are next. National-law supplementary liens or retention rights, if recognized, may come after that. Only then does any remaining value move to lower-ranking creditors and finally to the owner.
In the United States, the broad practical answer is similar but statutory terminology matters: court costs first, then preferred maritime liens, then the preferred mortgage, subject to the foreign-vessel necessaries wrinkle. In Turkey, the answer is: public wreck-removal costs can come first in the special case addressed by Article 1323(3); otherwise top-tier maritime liens under Article 1320(a)-(e) come ahead of mortgages and other security; general average contribution liens sit lower; and time limits can change everything if the claim is not preserved.
Why This Matters in Practice
For crew, priority rules mean wage claims are usually among the strongest claims against a vessel. For salvors, the rules protect the commercial logic of rescue by giving salvage super-priority over earlier liens. For mortgage banks, priority rules are a constant reminder that a ship mortgage, while powerful, is not always first in line. For suppliers, shipyards, and port interests, the lesson is that not every maritime debt is a top-tier maritime lien. For buyers, a properly conducted forced sale can cleanse the vessel of old encumbrances, but only if the sale satisfies the applicable legal requirements.
The core commercial lesson is simple: priority is outcome. Two creditors may both have valid claims, but the higher-ranking one may be paid in full while the lower-ranking one receives nothing. In shipping, that difference often turns on precise legal classification, preservation deadlines, and the forum whose law governs enforcement and sale.
Conclusion
Maritime liens and priority of claims answer the most practical question in vessel enforcement: who gets paid first from the ship or from the proceeds of its judicial sale? Under the 1993 Convention model, the answer is generally court and arrest expenses first, then core maritime liens, then registered mortgages, then lower-ranking claims. Under U.S. law, preferred maritime liens outrank the preferred mortgage, with specific statutory refinements. Under Turkish law, the main Article 1320(a)-(e) maritime liens outrank mortgages and other security, salvage enjoys special superiority, general average contribution is protected but ranks lower, and public wreck-removal costs can outrank all maritime claims in the special case provided by Article 1323(3).
So, the honest legal answer to “Who gets paid first?” is: it depends on the governing law, the type of claim, whether the claim is a true maritime lien, whether it has been preserved in time, and whether the vessel is being sold through a valid forced-sale process. But once those questions are answered, priority law becomes one of the clearest and most commercially decisive parts of maritime practice.
Yanıt yok