Spector v. Norwegian Cruise Line Ltd.
United States Supreme Court
545 U.S. 119 (2005)
- Written by Megan Petersen, JD
Facts
Norwegian Cruise Line Ltd. (NCL) (defendant) operated cruise ships. NCL’s principal place of business was Miami, and most of its passengers were Americans. NCL primarily advertised in the United States, and its tickets stated that any disputes were governed by American law. However, most of NCL’s ships were registered in other countries. In 1998 and 1999, Spector and other disabled Americans (plaintiffs) booked cruises on two NCL ships that were registered in the Bahamas. Spector brought a class-action suit on behalf of himself and other disabled persons seeking declaratory and injunctive relief under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Spector argued that the ADA required NCL to make reasonable modifications in its policies and procedures to accommodate disabled persons and to remove physical barriers to access if readily achievable. Spector claimed that NCL violated the ADA by, among other things, charging disabled persons higher fees and refusing to make structural accommodations. The district court held that Title III applied to foreign ships in United States territory. However, the court of appeals held that Spector’s suit was not viable because general statutes do not apply to foreign-flag vessels absent a clear indication of congressional intent. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kennedy, J.)
Concurrence (Ginsburg, J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (Thomas, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 778,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
