b'embarkation port to the debarkationenforced.Sotoo,individualstatestained by revising cruising terms and port, even if one and the same. may have statutes addressing waivers. conditiontermsappearingonevent contracts and tickets.Aninterlocutoryappeal(i.e.,anTheresult,inanycase,isagood appeal of a court ruling prior to thebounce for many excursion operators.PVAmembersareremindedofthe completed trial of a case) was takenForthetimebeing,thecaseallowsbenefitofalegalhotlineofferedto totheNinthCircuitCourtofAp- reason for vessel owners going fromall members for questions relating to peals by the defending boat company,point A and back to point A, to reex- this case, its implication for their doc-claimingthatsincetheexcursionamine whether a benefit can be ob- uments, or any other maritime issue.startedinLahainaHarborandre-turned to Lahaina Harbor, there was notravelbetweenportsandthus the Section 30527 did not bar waivers for negligence. ThePassengerVesselAssociation, by its General Counsel Steven Bers, Esq.,preparedasubmissiononbe-halfofPVAmembers,notingthe confusionthatarosefromtheHa-waiian decision as inconsistent with other Circuits, and confusing in its abandonmentofthemostlogical reading of the statute.On Feb. 8, 2024, the Ninth Circuit reversed the lower court. The Ninth CircuitagreedtoreadtheSection literally,asPVAadvocatedinits written submission. The Court ul-timately ruled that between ports must be given its natural meaning. Thus,anexcursionfromandre-turning to the same port is not pre-ventedbytheActfromobtaining an enforceable waiver of liability for ordinary negligence.As with all wins, one is never com-pletely out of the woods in the legal world.Thecaseisrecent,anditis yet to be seen if the decision will be appealedtotheSupremeCourtor whether there will be a request for en banc review, by the entire Ninth Cir-cuit bench. Also, it remains to be seen if waivers for gross negligence will be 37 MARCH 2024'