Many states prohibit or limit expressed indemnity obligations in an offshore service contract. Thus, it is important to determine whether state or maritime laws apply. Choice of law clauses cannot circumvent public policy. Further, the location or situs of an injury does not demand that maritime law apply to such indemnity clauses where the contract's work is platform centric. “The actual use of vessels in completing a contract may play a role when the expectations of the parties or the terms of a contract remain unclear.” In re Complaint of Offshore Oil Services, 24-30674 (5th Cir. Sept. 4, 2025). The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has once again clarified the application of its Doiron analysis arising from offshore operations involving platforms and vessels. 

This new ruling may impact how your contracts involving vessels are interpreted under maritime law. 

Read the full alert.

The Fifth Circuit is concerned with the focus of a contract and the intention of the parties versus the situs or a specific activity that was temporal when determining the applicable law. Offshore Oil Services illustrates how Doiron and Earnest analyses are consistent when the facts are considered.