A federal appeals court has ruled in favor of Celebrity Cruises in a lawsuit brought by two Filipino crew members who alleged false imprisonment and intentional infliction of emotional distress after being confined aboard a cruise ship for months during the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, Cruise Radio reported.
The Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal of the lawsuit, concluding that the crew members failed to establish that Celebrity’s actions were unlawful. The case centered on the experiences of Ryan Maunes Maglana and Francis Karl Bugayong, who were among thousands of cruise ship workers stranded at sea when international ports closed in early 2020.
Maglana and Bugayong were long-term employees of Celebrity Cruises, with 14 and 4 years of service respectively. As COVID-19 swept across the globe, cruise ships were denied entry to ports. Though passengers were eventually allowed to disembark in Singapore on February 10, 2020, Filipino crew members like Maglana and Bugayong were required to stay aboard since they were still under contract.
While Celebrity Millennium was anchored off the coast of San Diego, Maglana and Bugayong were terminated by Celebrity on March 30 for allegedly taking a bottle of expensive scotch from the ship’s bar. Despite their termination, the pandemic restrictions and CDC protocols kept them from leaving the ship.
The plaintiffs sued Celebrity Cruises in May 2020, alleging false imprisonment and intentional infliction of emotional distress. They claimed the extended confinement was unlawful and emotionally traumatic. Although Celebrity repatriated over 200 Filipino crew, including Maglana and Bugayong, via charter flight days after the lawsuit was filed, the legal dispute continued.
On remand, the district court once again dismissed the complaint—this time for failure to state a legal claim. That decision has now been affirmed by the Eleventh Circuit.
Chief Judge William Pryor, writing for the panel, explained that although the crew members were undoubtedly confined for a prolonged period under difficult circumstances, their complaint did not identify any specific U.S. or international law that was violated. In fact, the very No Sail Order they cited provided justification for keeping them onboard.
“To be sure, the pandemic forced Maglana and Bugayong into an unenviable position: They were trapped for months on a cruise ship without guidance about when they might return home. But the pandemic also gave Celebrity the unenviable job of repatriating thousands of crewmen to their homes around the globe, all while making sure that none encountered a member of the public. And, like the seamen, Celebrity faced a rapidly evolving crisis and changing guidelines. That Celebrity did not do this difficult job perfectly or as quickly as Maglana and Bugayong would have liked does not mean that its behavior was outrageous.”
