1. Whether , under federal maritime law, the
unambiguous terms of a written maritime
contract cannot be altered by parol
evidence, as this Court has held, or can be
contradicted and nullified by parol evidence
where one party later claims certain terms
were 'intended for its benefit ', as the Fifth
Circuit has now held.

2. Whether , under federal maritime law, a
shipowner facing a force majeure event has
a duty to exercise ordinary reasonable care,
as this Court has held, where hindsight
analysis cannot be used to determine the
reasonableness of the shipowner 's actions,
as held in the Eleventh Circuit and other
federal courts, or if this duty requires a
shipowner to act upon predictions only
verifiable through hindsight knowledge, a
new standard imposed by the Fifth Circuit.

Whether federal maritime law allows parol evidence to contradict unambiguous contract terms and whether a shipowner's duty of care during a force majeure event requires hindsight-based predictions