First-time visitors to Panama often find it anomalous that the Canal’s Atlantic terminus lies to the west of the Pacific one. From a legal standpoint it is scarcely less anomalous that, although Panama has substantial coastlines on both oceans, its courts have had few if any maritime cases during the first 80 years of the Republic’s existence. This anomaly is, of course, attributable to the fact that the country’s two main deep-water ports, Cristobal and Balboa, at either end of the Canal, were for so long under the jurisdiction of the United States.

The U.S. District Court for the District of the Canal Zone was the only competent forum to handle cases against the Panama Canal Company and also dealt with the enforcement of privileged maritime liens,1 personal injuries, and others, basically due to the effectiveness and adequate protection provided by the U.S. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Supplemental Admiralty Rules.

Under the new Panama Canal Treaties of 1978, the U.S. District Court for the District of the Canal Zone was to be closed on 1st April 1982 and Panama enacted Law No. 8 of 30th March 1982, whereby the Maritime Courts are created and rules of procedure are enacted,2 hereinafter called the “Maritime Law”. It should be noted that the draftsmen of the Maritime Law relied to a great extent on the U.S. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Supplemental Admiralty Rules.

To date, only one Maritime Court has been established under s. 3 of the Maritime Law. This court is open 24 hours a day, every day of the year, including holidays.3 It has exclusive jurisdiction over cases arising from or connected with maritime trade and navigation occurring within the territory of the Republic of Panama, its territorial sea, the navigable waters of its rivers and lakes and the Panama Canal waters.4