"Ed Floyd has noteworthy experience advising clients on maritime and trading law."Chambers & Partners USA 2020 - Ranked Individual
Edward Floyd is a partner with our firm and focuses on international disputes involving the shipping and commodities trading industries. He has extensive experience in federal courts across the United States and in arbitration proceedings under a range of rules.
Based in New York, Ed has also advocated in Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Georgia, Florida, Louisiana, Texas, Ohio, Illinois, Arkansas, and California. He also advises clients in commercial and maritime arbitrations under various sets of rules, including the SMA, ICC and GAFTA, as well as in ad hoc proceedings.
Ed’s experience includes matters involving general average, vessel collisions and allisions, all manner of charter parties and resulting disputes, vessel seizures, and sanctions. He is regularly engaged to handle allegations of fraud, corporate veil piercing and complex financial matters relating to the international shipping and commodities industries.
Ed is a 2004 graduate of Fordham Law School. He has cross-border qualifications, being admitted as an attorney in the United States (New York and New Jersey) and as a solicitor in England & Wales. He completed his undergraduate education at the United States Naval Academy, graduating in 1996 (with merit) and thereafter serving as an infantry officer on active duty in the US Marine Corps and primarily as an artillery officer in the reserves, with significant command experience and becoming a LtCol. That involvement in logistically intensive work complements his transportation related practice.
Ed’s native language is English, and he has a working knowledge of Italian and French.
Highlights of Ed’s most recent work include the following:
Advised Italian shipowner on sanctions related to trade in South and Middle America.
Advised major European shipping company on the provision of an insurance product in England, Australia and the United States.
Representation of European bank regarding recovery of a multi-million dollar claim against an insolvent entity under claims relating to mis-delivery of cargo. Assertively pursued security actions against possible assets and successfully obtained an attachment over assets belonging to an alter-ego in a US targeting a vessel in the Southern District of Texas. In a reported decision, successfully defeated post-discovery motion to vacate seizure order and dismiss action. Global litigation included proceedings in UK and East Asia.
Representation of Italian shipowners in defense of numerous cargo claims resulting from signficant vessel incident involving major container loss.
Representation of clients, multiple entities from multiple countries involved in exchange trading business, in defense of fraud allegations brought by a Greek billionaire and related companies.
Representation of Eastern European state in the Southern District of New York regarding enforcement proceedings arising from an UNCITRAL arbitral award. Successfully obtained attachment of funds deposited with arbitral body.
Representing a global trading service in a successful strike out/summary judgment application and security for costs application in the High Court of England & Wales, after allegations were made of breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty and commission of the tort of conspiracy to injure by unlawful means.
Advised Skandinavian shipowner regarding informal arrest of vessel in Venezuela on claims of “stolen cargo” valued at several million USD.
Defended oil spill indemnification claims against client time charterer following oil spill event on Mississippi.
Representaiotn of major turkish conglomerate in pursuit of claims against US manufacturer of heavy equipment for defects and return of deposits, successful defeat of subject matter jurisdiction challenge involving the structural nature of a Turkish A.S. (Anonim Sirket).
Interested in specific aspects of Ed’s recent work? Contact email@example.com for further reference cases.
Floyd (lecturer), “Interrelation between maritime law and national security” FZ Presentation, 30.07.2020
Bankruptcy proceedings Part 13 in our series on how to deal with the economic crisis – a guide for international businesses. Edward Floyd, founding Partner at ZFZ, addresses US bankruptcy proceedings in light of recent events and gives an overview of the inner workings of Title 11 of the US Code. What protections can a creditor rely on when a counterparty is insolvent? This is a central consideration in protecting a party’s exposure in what is at best a timid market and may be a full-blown financial crisis. The US scheme also covers the handling of foreign bankruptcy proceedings and knowing the areas of law and issues where to stand your ground is key to maximize a creditor’s chances of prevailing and finding some measure of recovery in the collective proceeding that is bankruptcy. Having skilled counsel provide timely and dynamic advice as counterparty risk increases or defaults become apparent, can be of immense benefit to creditors. ZFZ has been very active in this area. We have been involved in high profile bankruptcies and are happy to discuss the cross-section between maritime law and bankruptcy. For further information please contact Ed Floyd or anyone from the ZFZ team to discuss this, or any of the other topics in the video series.
Partner Edward Floyd had the honor this week of briefing a great group from the US intel community on the interrelation between maritime law and national security.
A four-month delay in bringing an anti-suit injunction was held to prevent its issue in Enka v Chubb Insurance  1 Lloyd’s Rep. 71. PJSC was the contractor for the construction of a power plant.
The inter-club agreement is designed to prevent litigation. It normally does so, so any reporting providing further clarity is welcome.
The Australian federal court, in an exceptional case, emphasised its reach over arbitration tribunals in a recent judgment.
The vessel was time-chartered on an NYPE form containing the BIMCO Non-Payment of Hire Clause. Hire was payable 15 days in advance, every 15 days.
Lerch, Zadkovich and Floyd (authors), “International Uniformity and Maritime Liens over Cargo: An Ocean Not Easily Navigated”, Tulane Maritime Law Journal [44 TUL. MAR. L.J. 251 (2020)].
“International Uniformity and Maritime Liens
over Cargo: An Ocean Not Easily Navigated”
We are excited to share our full journal article published by the prestigious and highly acclaimed Tulane Maritime Law Journal [44 TUL. MAR. L.J. 251 (2020)], co-authored by Aiden Lerch, Luke Zadkovich and Edward Floyd.
US Supreme Court decides that the safe berth clause establishes a warranty of safety. A monumental, yet widely expected, decision.
BIMCO rounded off 2019 by releasing an overhaul of the BIMCO Sanctions Clause. Owners previously held the right to ignore charterers’ orders based on owners’ “reasonable judgment”. That right is removed. This will be of some comfort to charterers, who will be pleased to see the back of a subjective test in owners’ favour.
This note reports on an interesting and important US federal court decision concerning sanctions enforcement and, significantly, a rare instance of a business challenging OFAC’s interpretation of a US sanctions regime. Exxon was successful in voiding a US$2 million sanctions penalty. However, for the rest of us this case demonstrates why caution around sanctions remains of paramount importance.