Legal Definitions - libel of review

A libel of review is a specialized legal procedure within maritime law. It allows a party to challenge a court's final judgment or decree even after the standard time limit for filing an appeal has already passed. This is an extraordinary measure, typically reserved for situations where there is a fundamental error evident in the court's record, newly discovered evidence that could not have been presented earlier, or a significant injustice that needs to be corrected.

Here are some examples to illustrate this concept:

• Example 1: Newly Discovered Evidence

  Imagine a shipping company was found liable in a maritime court for significant damage to a cargo shipment. The court issued a final decree, and the deadline for filing an appeal passed without the company challenging the decision. Months later, a previously lost or overlooked ship's logbook is discovered. This logbook contains entries from the captain that conclusively prove the damage was caused by an unprecedented and unforeseeable storm, not by any negligence on the part of the shipping company.

  How this illustrates the term: In this scenario, the shipping company could potentially file a libel of review. This is because critical new evidence has emerged *after* the final judgment and the expiration of the appeal period, which fundamentally alters the basis of the original finding of liability.

• Example 2: Fundamental Error on the Face of the Record

  Consider a maritime dispute over the ownership and salvage rights of a valuable sunken treasure. The court issues a final decree outlining the division of assets among several parties. Due to a clerical mistake by the court clerk, the final decree incorrectly awards one party a significantly larger percentage of the treasure than what was actually decided by the judge and agreed upon in the original settlement terms presented to the court. This error goes unnoticed until after the appeal period has expired.

  How this illustrates the term: A libel of review might be an appropriate course of action here. There is a clear, fundamental error directly visible within the court's own official record (the final decree) that leads to an unjust outcome, and the opportunity for a standard appeal to correct this mistake has already passed.

• Example 3: Fraud or Misrepresentation

  A fishing vessel owner lost a maritime case concerning a collision at sea, with the court finding them entirely at fault based heavily on the testimony of a key witness for the opposing side. After the final judgment was issued and the appeal period closed, it was conclusively proven that the key witness had committed perjury, fabricating their account of the incident to intentionally mislead the court and secure a favorable outcome for the other party.

  How this illustrates the term: The discovery of such significant fraud or perjury, which directly influenced the court's final decision and was not known or reasonably discoverable during the original trial or appeal period, could be grounds for initiating a libel of review to challenge the unjust decree.