UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

MIAMI DIVISION

CASE NO. _____ CV _____

Zyra Cayanga,

Plaintiff,

vs.

CELEBRITY CRUISE LINES,

LTD. a foreign corporation,

Defendant.

_____________________________/

PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff ZYRA CAYANGA sues Defendant CELEBRITY CRUISE LINES, a foreign 

corporation, and alleges:

Nature Of The Action

1. Plaintiff was raped in her cabin while employed as a crewmember aboard one of 

Defendant’s cruise ships. The perpetrator worked for Defendant as a security guard on the same 

vessel. Plaintiff brings this maritime lawsuit against Defendant to recover damages resulting from 

the rape and Defendant’s independent wrongdoing before and after the sexual assault took place.

The Parties, Jurisdiction, And Venue

2. Plaintiff is a citizen and resident of the Philippines and over the age of 21.

3. Defendant is a for-profit corporation headquartered in Miami-Dade County, 

Florida. Defendant’s vessel, the Celebrity Apex (“Apex”), uses Port Everglades and Port of Miami 

as home ports and operates seven-day voyage itineraries from these ports.

4. The Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§

Case 1:22-cv-21678-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/01/2022 Page 1 of 24
Page | 2

1331 and 1333 because Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant arise under U.S. General Maritime 

Law and the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C. § 30104.

5. The Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because Defendant maintains a 

substantial base of operations in Florida; is authorized to do business in Florida and conducts 

substantial business in Florida; and has engaged in substantial and not isolated activity within 

Florida. Defendant also has sufficient minimum contacts with Florida, or has otherwise 

intentionally availed itself of the Florida market, to render the exercise of jurisdiction by this Court 

over Defendant permissible under traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.

6. Venue is proper in the Southern District of Florida because Defendant does 

business in this District and this District has personal jurisdiction over it. 

Facts Regarding The Rape

7. Plaintiff was employed by Defendant as a security guard aboard Defendant’s 

vessel, the Apex. The rape giving rise to this action occurred on August 7, 2020, while Plaintiff

was off duty and asleep in her cabin. The perpetrator, who also worked for Defendant as a ship’s 

security guard, broke into Plaintiff’s cabin using a magnetic passkey and then sexually penetrated

her without her consent. 

8. The following morning, Plaintiff immediately reported the incident to her 

supervisor and the shipboard human resources manager. The ship’s chief security officer 

confirmed that a security guard named “Dennis Alisla” (“Dennis”) used his master key to break 

into Plaintiff’s cabin the night before. 

9. After reporting the rape, Plaintiff was referred to the ship’s medical facility to 

undergo a sexual assault examination and have photographs taken of her body, genitalia, and the

clothing she was wearing at the time of the assault. 

Case 1:22-cv-21678-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/01/2022 Page 2 of 24
Page | 3

10. The Apex was in a shipyard in Saint Nazaire, France when the rape occurred. On 

Monday, August 10, 2020, Plaintiff filed a police incident report with the local French authorities 

who collected evidence from her cabin and had her undergo another sexual assault examination. 

11. On August 11, 2020, perpetrator Dennis was taken into custody by the local French 

authorities and released twenty-four hours later after questioning. 

12. Upon information and belief, Defendant placed perpetrator Dennis on 

administrative leave from employment and repatriated him to the Philippines. 

13. On August 12, 2020, Plaintiff was summoned by the local French authorities and 

advised that no further action would be taken on her case because it was based on a “he said, she 

said in a foreign language,” and Malta, the Apex’ flag country, was not willing to assume 

responsibility over the investigation and/or prosecution of the reported sexual assault. When at the 

police station, Plaintiff saw perpetrator Dennis smiling. 

14. In the ensuing days, Plaintiff sought assistance from Defendant to have perpetrator

Dennis prosecuted in the Philippines but was told “to get over it, to forget about it, that it’s in the 

past,” and to “move on as she was only making herself crazy thinking about the assault.” 

15. On August 12, 2020, Defendant arranged a telemedicine consult with a trauma 

counselor from Miami. The counselor noted that Plaintiff was “struggling with acute stress-related 

impacts, vivid crying spells, loss of appetite and motivation, restlessness, racing thoughts and 

difficulties with sleep.” The counselor recommended that Plaintiff continue with therapy for the 

trauma she experienced.

16. The following week, Plaintiff remained locked in her cabin crying unconsolably, 

depressed, and ashamed over what she had experienced. Plaintiff also was unable to sleep,

worrying about how she would be received by her young son who she left in her mother’s care 

Case 1:22-cv-21678-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/01/2022 Page 3 of 24
Page | 4

while she set out to work in order provide for them.

17. Once in the Philippines, Defendant referred Plaintiff to a gynecologist and a 

psychiatrist through Shiphealth Inc., a facility located in Manila, Philippines that works closely 

with Defendant and the Philippine attorneys who represent Defendant. 

18. At all times material, all medical and psychological counseling that Plaintiff 

received was from physicians selected and approved by Defendant and Shiphealth.

19. On March 31, 2021, after approximately seven telemedicine consults, Shiphealth 

declared that Plaintiff was at Maximum Medical Improvement (“MMI”) from Post-Traumatic 

Stress Disorder. Defendant terminated all medical and counseling treatment based on this MMI 

declaration.

20. Plaintiff pleaded with Defendant for continued medical and counseling treatment; 

Defendant, however, willfully, arbitrarily, and capriciously refused to provide her with any further 

maintenance and cure as required under General Maritime Law.

21. Plaintiff sought to have perpetrator Dennis prosecuted by Philippine authorities. 

The authorities denied Plaintiff’s prosecution request on the ground they did not have jurisdiction 

over a crime committed overseas. 

The Employment Contract And Arbitration Provision

22. Plaintiff was hired by Defendant to work as a security guard aboard the Apex1

. 

(Exhibit 1).

23. As a Filipina seafarer, Plaintiff is subject to the Philippine Overseas Employment 

Agency (“POEA”) employment contract and corresponding “Standard Terms and Conditions

1 Plaintiff completed three prior contracts with Defendant before the August 7, 2020 rape. 

Case 1:22-cv-21678-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/01/2022 Page 4 of 24
Page | 5

Governing the Overseas Employment of Filipino Seafarers on Board Ocean-Going Ships” 

(“Standard Terms and Conditions”). (Exhibit 2). 

24. Section 29 of the Standard Terms and Conditions provides: 

DISPUTE SETTLEMENT PROCEDURES In cases of claims and disputes arising 

from this employment, the parties covered by a collective bargaining agreement shall 

submit the claim or dispute to the original and exclusive jurisdiction of the voluntary 

arbitrator or panel of voluntary arbitrators. If the parties are not covered by a collective 

bargaining agreement, the parties may at their option submit the claim or dispute to 

either the original and exclusive jurisdiction of the National Labor Relations 

Commission (NLRC), pursuant to Republic Act (RA) 8042 otherwise known as the 

Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995, as amended, or to the original 

and exclusive jurisdiction of the voluntary arbitrator or panel of arbitrators. If there 

is no provision as to the voluntary arbitrators to be appointed by the parties, the same 

shall appointed from the accredited voluntary arbitrators of the National Conciliation 

and Mediation Board of the Department of Labor and Employment. The Philippine 

Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) shall exercise original and exclusive 

jurisdiction to hear and decide disciplinary action on cases, which are administrative 

in character, involving or arising out of violations of recruitment laws, rules and 

regulations involving employers, principals, contracting partners and Filipino 

seafarers. (Ex. 2, § 29; emphasis added). 

25. The Standard Terms and Conditions defines a work-related injury as an “injury 

arising out of and in the course of employment.” (Exhibit 2,“Definition of Terms” ¶17).

26. The plain language of the Dispute Settlement Procedures in Section 29 requires 

arbitration only if the claim is related to and arises out of and in the course of the crewmember’s 

employment. 

27. Section 31 of the Standard Terms and Conditions, the choice of law clause, 

confirms that the arbitration provision in Section 29 applies only where the crewmember’s “claim 

... aris[es] out of or in connection with this contract ...” (Exhibit 2, § 31).

28. In other words, a crewmember’s claim against Defendant is subject to arbitration 

only where the claim arises out of and in the course of the crewmember’s employment and bears

a relationship to the crewmember’s contractual duties.

Case 1:22-cv-21678-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/01/2022 Page 5 of 24
Page | 6

29. All of Plaintiff’s claims are based on the rape that occurred in her cabin while she 

was off duty and asleep. Plaintiff’s claims fall outside the scope of the arbitration provision since 

the sexual assault did not arise out of and in the course of her employment and bears no relationship 

to performance of her contractual duties as a security guard.

30. Pursuant to the Standard Terms and Conditions, Plaintiff sought the recommended 

psychological treatment following the rape. As noted previously in this Complaint, Defendant 

selected Shiphealth in Manila to provide such treatment.

31. On March 31, 2021, Shiphealth medical providers declared Plaintiff to be at MMI

and issued a “Certificate of Work Relation.” This Certificate states: “Based on the medical 

information presented and the patient’s clinical manifestation as well as the known causes of the 

patient’s medical condition, ... there is no evidence of the patient’s condition’s relation to work, 

and it is considered NOT WORK-RELATED. It is also NOT INCLUDED in the POEA list of 

occupational diseases.” (Exhibit 3).

32. Along these same lines, on April 26, 2021, Defendant’s counsel in Manila advised 

the undersigned that “... the alleged incident was outside of working hours and not related to any 

work activity or incident thereto on board the ship... As Ms. Cayanga’s condition is not work 

related, she is not entitled to any disability compensation.” (Exhibit 4). Defendant accordingly 

refused to pay Plaintiff any disability compensation for injuries/medical conditions arising from 

the rape.

PLAINTIFF’S DISABILITY CLAIM BEFORE THE NLRC

33. After Defendant denied Plaintiff any disability compensation, Plaintiff filed a claim 

with the Philippines National Labor Relations Commission (“NLRC”), pursuant to Section 29 of 

the Standard Terms and Conditions.

Case 1:22-cv-21678-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/01/2022 Page 6 of 24
Page | 7

34. On April 22, 2022, the NLRC Arbiter issued its Decision, which tracked the 

findings of Defendant’s designated physicians at Shiphealth: he ruled that (i) Plaintiff’s “mental 

disorder disturbance” from the rape was not work-related and not aggravated by work conditions; 

and (ii) in any event, the “final disability grading that closely corresponds to [Plaintiff’s] functional 

capacity is Grade 10-slight mental disorder disturbance.” (Exhibit 5). The NLRC Arbiter awarded 

Plaintiff US $10,075.00 in disability benefits and US $1,075.00 in attorney’s fees but denied moral 

damages or exemplary damages because Plaintiff supposedly failed to prove bad faith or malice 

on Defendant’s part in denying her work-related disability claims. (Exhibit 5). 

35. Given Defendant’s stated position that the rape was not related to Plaintiff’s work 

-- and the NLRC Arbiter’s ruling which adopted that position -- Plaintiff’s claims based on the 

rape are deemed unrelated to and not in any way connected to her employment or her job duties as

a shipboard security guard.

36. Given Defendant’s stated position that the rape was not related to Plaintiff’s work 

-- and the NLRC Arbiter’s ruling which adopted that position – Plaintiff’s claims based on the rape

are not subject to the Dispute Settlement Procedures contained in Section 29 of the Standard Terms 

and Conditions incorporated into her employment contract with Defendant.

37. Arbitration is a matter of consent, not coercion. A basic tenet of arbitration law is 

that a party is not required to arbitrate a claim unless he or she has agreed to submit the claim to 

arbitration.

38. Because Plaintiff and Defendant agreed to arbitrate only work-related disability 

claims arising from Plaintiff’s employment as an Apex security guard, Plaintiff’s claims in this 

lawsuit for damages resulting from the rape are not subject to the Dispute Settlement Procedures 

contained in Standard Terms and Conditions Section 29.

Case 1:22-cv-21678-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/01/2022 Page 7 of 24
Page | 8

Defendant’s Legal Duties Owed To Plaintiff

39. Defendant employed and controlled the crewmembers of the Apex.

40. Defendant employed Plaintiff to serve as a seaman, as defined by the Jones Act,

46 U.S.C. 30104, and General Maritime Law, aboard the Apex.

41. Pursuant to the Jones Act, Defendant owed Plaintiff the duty to provide a 

reasonably safe place to work and live aboard the Apex.

42. Pursuant to General Maritime Law, Defendant owed Plaintiff the absolute and 

nondelegable duty to provide a seaworthy vessel.

43. Pursuant to the Jones Act and General Maritime Law, Defendant owed Plaintiff

the nondelegable duty to arrange, provide, and pay for prompt, adequate, and complete medical 

care and treatment for illnesses and/or injuries sustained while in the service of the Apex.

44. Pursuant to the Jones Act and General Maritime Law, Defendant owed Plaintiff 

the nondelegable duty to provide timely and complete maintenance and cure for illnesses or 

injuries sustained while in the service of the Apex.

45. Defendant’s duty to provide shipboard medical treatment and timely and complete

maintenance and cure exists on a no-fault basis since Plaintiff’s injuries and illness arose while in 

the service of the Apex under federal maritime law.

Defendant’s Knowledge Regarding The Prevalence Of Sexual Assaults And Its Failure 

To Provide A Reasonably Safe Environment For Crewmembers On Its Cruise Ships 

46. In the years preceding Plaintiff’s rape on the Apex, there have been many incidents 

of sexual harassment, sexual assaults (rape), and other sex crimes, committed against both female 

and male crew members as well as passengers aboard Defendant’s vessels.

2

2

 The prevalence of sex crimes committed aboard cruise ships led to passage of the Cruise Vessel 

Case 1:22-cv-21678-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/01/2022 Page 8 of 24
Page | 9

47. In fact, while serving as a security officer on Defendant’ cruise ship Equinox in 

2019, Plaintiff was the first responder to the rape of a female crewmember by another 

crewmember. The perpetrator of that sexual assault is in federal custody and awaiting trial in St. 

Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Plaintiff has been called to testify in federal court on behalf of the 

U.S. government in that criminal case.

48. Given the highly sensitive nature of sex crimes, and the negative publicity sex 

crimes attract, the cruise lines, including Defendant, have sought to keep these events from public 

view by entering into confidential settlements and inserting provisions in crewmember 

employment contracts which call for arbitration of claims and disputes in foreign forums under 

foreign law. Nevertheless, publicized reports of sexual assaults committed by crewmembers 

against other crewmembers, crewmembers against passengers, and even passengers against 

crewmembers, confirm that such assaults frequently occur. 

49. The frequent sexual crimes and incidents of violence against women on

Defendant’s cruise ships are due to an inadequate number of experienced and properly trained 

security guards; a shipboard culture where subordinate female crewmember promotions are 

determined based on whether they give in to the sexual advances of their superiors; the lack of 

adequately positioned and monitored closed circuit television cameras (“CCTV”) in and around

crewmember quarters; and poor training, instruction, and supervision of crewmembers.

50. Female crewmembers often are afraid to report abusive sexual behavior because 

they are ignored, demoted, or terminated from employment, or the employment of both the victim

and the assailant is terminated.

Security and Safety Act of 2010. 46 U.S.C. § 3507; Pub. L. No. 111-207, 124 Stat. 2243.

Case 1:22-cv-21678-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/01/2022 Page 9 of 24
Page | 10

51. Defendant was on actual notice of the problem with female crewmembers being 

sexually harassed and sexually assaulted on its cruise ships but has refused to take reasonable steps 

to protect its female crewmembers and/or prosecute the perpetrators. As a result of Defendant’s 

negligence and/or intentional decision not to implement changes in its training and security 

protocols, Defendant’s cruise ships, including the Apex, present an unreasonable danger to 

unsuspecting women crewmembers like Plaintiff. 

52. Defendant also has attempted to eliminate the rights of its ill or injured

crewmembers, including rape victims like Plaintiff, to timely and appropriate medical care by 

contracting with medical provider facilities like Shiphealth, which serve to protect the 

interests of the cruise lines and the protection and indemnity clubs insuring their vessels.

53. Instead of meeting its nondelegable duty to provide its ill or injured crewmembers

with maintenance and cure, Defendant routinely seeks to circumvent its maritime obligations via

hiring agents in foreign countries. These hiring agents enjoy a lucrative business relationship with 

Defendant and make substantial monies by providing Defendant with thousands of employees to 

work on the cruise ships. The hiring agent’s loyalty is to Defendant, not to the injured or ill 

crewmember.

54. Defendant administers the budgeting of the maintenance and cure owed to its 

crewmembers by hiring claims personnel trained to limit the medical expenses spent per cruise

ship. These employees are trained to deny claims in an HMO-like scheme with the goal of saving

money at the expense of crewmembers’ health and welfare. These employees defer to in house 

lawyers who oversee “medical” decisions using non-medical cost-driven criteria.

55. In furtherance of its improper objectives, Defendant has refused to provide Plaintiff

with prompt, adequate, and complete medical care and treatment, medicine, and therapy following 

Case 1:22-cv-21678-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/01/2022 Page 10 of 24
Page | 11

the rape on the Apex.

56. Defendant’s failure and refusal to provide Plaintiff with prompt, adequate, and

complete medical care and treatment, medicine, and therapy caused and/or contributed to her

medical condition, substantially worsened her medical condition, and caused and/or contributed 

to the deterioration of her emotional and mental wellbeing.

57. Defendant’s conduct is unconscionable: Defendant knows from experience that

Plaintiff does not have rights to any medical treatment or disability compensation for a rape/sexual 

assault aboard Defendant’s vessel under the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration 

(“POEA”) laws since such claims are deemed “not work-related.”

58. Defendant has deliberately sought to evade liability for sex crimes perpetrated 

on its crewmembers by having them enter into employment agreements and/or adhesion 

contracts which contain forced arbitration clauses and provisions imposing foreign 

substantive laws and procedures. Defendant’s intent in doing so is to deprive 

crewmembers of their right to bring their claims in a U.S. court (as they have been able to do 

for decades), and to deprive crewmembers of any meaningful remedies.

59. These unilateral actions by Defendant are evidence of its willful and arbitrary 

scheme to deprive ill or injured crewmembers, including rape victims like Plaintiff, of their rights 

and remedies under U.S. statutory and General Maritime Law.

60. The highly unfair and involuntary nature of arbitration clauses in the sexual assault 

context led President Biden to sign into law, on March 3, 2022, federal legislation entitled the

“Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021,” Pub. L. No. 

117-90, 136 Stat. 26. The Act, which is codified at 9 U.S.C. §§ 401-402, invalidates any arbitration 

agreement that requires arbitration of a claim brought under federal law relating to a 

Case 1:22-cv-21678-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/01/2022 Page 11 of 24
Page | 12

“nonconsensual sexual act or sexual contact.”3

61. Defendant failed and refused to provide Plaintiff with the maintenance and

cure which Defendant was legally obligated to provide under General Maritime Law.

62. Defendant’s failure and refusal to provide prompt, adequate, and complete wages

and maintenance and cure was and is intentional, willful, arbitrary, and capricious, without any

legal justification whatsoever, and in callous disregard of Plaintiff’s rights as a seaman.

63. Defendant’s misconduct substantially delayed Plaintiff’s medical care and 

treatment and compromised her emotional, mental, and physical health and wellbeing.

COUNT I

NEGLIGENCE AGAINST DEFENDANT

64. Plaintiff adopts and realleges paragraphs 1 through 63 as if fully set forth herein, and 

further alleges:

65. Plaintiff brings this claim against Defendant for its own negligent acts and omissions 

which allowed perpetrator Dennis to enter Plaintiff’s cabin without permission and rape her.

66. At all times material, Defendant owed Plaintiff the duty to exercise reasonable and 

ordinary care to keep and maintain the premises where Plaintiff lived and worked (i.e., Defendant’s 

vessel, the Apex) in a safe condition.

67. Defendant breached its duty of reasonable care as follows:

a. Defendant negligently failed to conduct adequate pre-employment screening of 

crewmembers in general, and perpetrator Dennis in particular, to determine the crewmembers’

psychological and emotional fitness to work for extended periods in a closed environment with 

little or no recreational down time and away from loved ones;

3 The Act applies to disputes and claims that arise or accrue after the date of enactment. Passage 

of the act, however, evinces Congress’ longstanding public policy of protecting the rights of sex

crimes victims. 

Case 1:22-cv-21678-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/01/2022 Page 12 of 24
Page | 13

b. Defendant negligently entrusted perpetrator Dennis with a master passkey that

allowed him to break into Plaintiff’s cabin and rape her;

c. After the female crewmember was raped aboard the Equinox, as alleged above 

in paragraph 47, Defendant negligently failed to implement measures to preventsexual assaults of other 

female crewmembers aboard their vessels;

d. Defendant failed to assist Plaintiff in seeking the prosecution by competent legal 

authorities of perpetrator Dennis in either the U.S., France, Malta, or the Philippines; Defendant 

instead left Plaintiff to bring her assailant before legal authorities, causing her aggravation of 

her mental and psychological health and wellbeing.

e. Defendant failed to promulgate and/or enforce adequate policies and procedures 

to prevent (and stop already occurring) sexual assaults and sexual harassment on board its 

vessels;

f. Defendant failed to implement adequate security policies and procedures 

necessary to protect its crewmembers; and

g. Defendant failed to hire and/or retain and/or train competent protection for 

crewmembers like Plaintiff.

68. Defendant knew of the forgoing conditions which caused Plaintiff’s harm and did

not correct them, or the conditions existed for a sufficient length of time so that Defendant, in the 

exercise of reasonable care, should have learned of them and corrected them. 

69. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s breaches of its duties and 

negligence, Plaintiff suffered harm, including but not limited to, bodily injury, mental pain and 

suffering, mental anguish, emotional distress, loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life, physical 

disability and impairment, inconvenience in the normal pursuits and pleasures of life, feelings of 

economic insecurity caused by her disability, aggravation of any previously existing conditions,

medical expenses in the care and treatment of her injuries, including psychiatric care and

medications, lost wages, income lost in the past, and her working ability and earning capacity has

Case 1:22-cv-21678-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/01/2022 Page 13 of 24
Page | 14

been impaired. These losses, injuries, and damages are either permanent or continuing in nature, 

and Plaintiff will suffer these losses, injuries, and damages in the future.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Zyra Cayanga demands judgment against Defendant Celebrity 

Cruise Lines, Ltd. for compensatory damages, together with costs, interest, prejudgment interest,

and any other relief this Court deems appropriate. Plaintiff demands a jury trial on all issues.

COUNT II

STRICT LIABILITY AGAINST DEFENDANT FOR THE

INTENTIONAL ACTS OF ITS EMPLOYEE DENNIS

70. Plaintiff adopts and realleges paragraphs 1 through 63 as if fully set forth herein, and 

further alleges:

71. Defendant employed perpetrator Dennis as a security guard aboard the Apex. As such, 

Defendant had inherent authority to control perpetrator Dennis’ day-to-day job duties and 

determine whether to renew or terminate his contracts.

72. Perpetrator Dennis used a master passkey, which Defendant negligently entrusted 

him with, to access Plaintiff’s cabin and rape her.

73. By virtue of Defendant’s principal/agent relationship with perpetrator Dennis, 

Defendant is strictly liable to Plaintiff for perpetrator Dennis’ intentional wrongdoing.

74. As a direct and proximate result of perpetrator Dennis’ sexual assault of Plaintiff, 

Plaintiff suffered harm, including but not limited to, bodily injury, mental pain and suffering, 

mental anguish, emotional distress, loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life, physical disability 

and impairment, inconvenience in the normal pursuits and pleasures of life, feelings of economic 

insecurity caused by her disability, aggravation of any previously existing conditions, medical 

expenses in the care and treatment of her injuries, including psychiatric care and medications, lost

wages, income lost in the past, and her working ability and earning capacity has been impaired.

Case 1:22-cv-21678-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/01/2022 Page 14 of 24
Page | 15

These losses, injuries, and damages are either permanent or continuing in nature, and Plaintiff will 

suffer these losses, injuries, and damages in the future.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Zyra Cayanga demands judgment against Defendant Celebrity 

Cruise Lines, Ltd. for compensatory damages, together with costs, interest, prejudgment interest, 

and any other relief this Court deems appropriate. Plaintiff demands a jury trial on all issues.

COUNT III

SPOLIATION OF EVIDENCE

75. Plaintiff adopts and realleges paragraphs 1 through 63 as if fully set forth herein, and 

further alleges:

76. Defendant’s crewmember sexually assaulted fellow crewmember Plaintiff while

aboard Defendant’s cruise ship, the Apex..

77. Defendant had a duty to preserve evidence including Plaintiff’s blood, urine, and 

DNA, medical records, laboratory tests results, CCTV tapes, door activity reports, telephone 

records, and Plaintiff’s belongings gathered at the scene of the crime, statements, photographs, and

forensic evidence, and to not permit the evidence to be lost, altered, damaged, or destroyed.

78. Alternatively, Defendant voluntarily undertook and commenced performance of

the duty to preserve the evidence and was thereby obligated to act in a reasonablemanner.

78. Plaintiff had potential causes of action against third parties, including against 

perpetrator Dennis for raping her. The spoliated evidence was directly relevant to these causes of 

action. Plaintiff had a right to have this evidence preserved, inspected, and retained by competent 

and experienced investigators, experts, and forensic scientists.

79. Defendant negligently and/or intentionally and/or maliciously caused and/or

permitted this relevant evidence to be lost, altered, damaged, or destroyed.

Case 1:22-cv-21678-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/01/2022 Page 15 of 24
Page | 16

80. Defendant’s failure to preserve the evidence has significantly impaired Plaintiff’s 

ability to prove potential causes of action against Defendant and others, including perpetrator 

Dennis, and has interfered with the efforts of law enforcement authorities to successfully 

investigate the crime and bring Defendant’s crewmember to justice.

81. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s breach of the foregoing legal duty 

to preserve evidence, Plaintiff incurred damages, including the inability to prove a civil case of 

personal injury and/or a criminal case of sexual assault and battery (rape) against the third party

or parties responsible for the crime.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Zyra Cayanga demands judgment against Defendant Celebrity 

Cruise Lines, Ltd. for compensatory damages, together with costs, interest, prejudgment interest, 

and any other relief this Court deems appropriate. Plaintiff demands a jury trial on all issues.

COUNT IV

JONES ACT NEGLIGENCE

82. Plaintiff adopts and realleges paragraphs 1 through 63 as if fully set forth herein, and 

further alleges:

83. At all times material, Defendant employed Plaintiff as a seaman, within the 

definition of the Jones Act, to serve as an Apex crewmember while in in navigable waters.

84. Defendant owed Plaintiff the duty to provide a safe place to work such that Plaintiff 

could perform her job obligations in a reasonably safe manner and live aboard the vessel free from

sexual violence and/or sexual harassment. Defendant breached the foregoing duty by:

a. Failing to use reasonable care to provide Plaintiff with a safe place to work and live 

on the cruise ship;

b. Failing to provide a reasonable number of experienced and trained security officers, 

Case 1:22-cv-21678-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/01/2022 Page 16 of 24
Page | 17

supervisors, and guards on the cruise ship and/or otherwise provide adequate security to its female

crewmembers;

c. Failing to install monitored security cameras on the cruise ship in the crew area and 

public areas to serve as a deterrent to incidents of sexual harassment and/or assault and/or or to

permit Defendant to timely to respond to such incidents;

d. Failing to provide adequate training, instruction, and supervision of its 

crewmembers;

e. Failing to maintain and enforce reasonable rules and regulations regarding the 

prevention of sexual harassment and/or sexual assault;

f. Refusing to implement the recommendations of security experts;

g. Failing to perform adequate background checks and psychological screening of its

employees;

h. Negligently hiring, selecting, and retaining crewmembers with dangerous 

propensities;

i. Failing to adequately investigate prior incidents and injuries where crewmembers 

and passengers have been sexually assaulted and/or harassed on the Apex and other vessels in

Defendant’s fleet of cruise ships;

j. Ignoring prior complaints of sexual assault and sexual harassment on the Apex and 

other vessels in Defendant’s fleet of cruise ships and failing to implement a system for protecting 

female employees and passengers on the cruise ships;

k. Covering up prior incidents of sexual assault and/or sexual harassment aboard its

fleet of cruise ships;

l. Failing to respond reasonably to incidents of sexual assault and/or sexual 

Case 1:22-cv-21678-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/01/2022 Page 17 of 24
Page | 18

harassment;

m. Requiring Plaintiff to work under hostile conditions;

n. Failing to warn Plaintiff of the unreasonably dangerous conditions which existed 

on the Apex including rapists on cruise ships;

o. Failing to provide prompt, adequate, and complete medical care, which aggravated

Plaintiff’s injuries and caused her to experience additional pain and suffering and disability.

85. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s breaches of its duties and 

negligence, Plaintiff suffered harm, including but not limited to, bodily injury, mental pain and 

suffering, mental anguish, emotional distress, loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life, physical 

disability and impairment, inconvenience in the normal pursuits and pleasures of life, feelings of 

economic insecurity caused by her disability, aggravation of any previously existing conditions,

medical expenses in the care and treatment of her injuries, including psychiatric care and

medications, lost wages, income lost in the past, and her working ability and earning capacity has

been impaired. These losses, injuries, and damages are either permanent or continuing in nature, 

and Plaintiff will suffer these losses, injuries, and damages in the future.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Zyra Cayanga demands judgment against Defendant Celebrity 

Cruise Lines, Ltd. for compensatory damages, together with costs, interest, prejudgment interest, 

and any other relief this Court deems appropriate. Plaintiff demands a jury trial on all issues.

COUNT V

UNSEAWORTHINESS

86. Plaintiff adopts and realleges paragraphs 1 through 63 as if fully set forth herein, and 

further alleges:

87. Under General Maritime Law, a shipowner has an absolute and nondelegable duty 

Case 1:22-cv-21678-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/01/2022 Page 18 of 24
Page | 19

to furnish a seaworthy vessel. The shipowner’s duty is breached when a temporary or permanent 

condition of the vessel renders the vessel not reasonably fit for its intended use.

88. The shipowner's duty to furnish a seaworthy vessel extends to the vessel’s crew. 

The shipowner breaches its duty to provide a seaworthy vessel by manning the vessel with an unfit, 

incompetent, inadequate, or improperly trained or supervised crew.

89. Defendant employed and controlled the crew of the Apex, and implemented work 

practices aboard the vessel.

90. Defendant owed Plaintiff the nondelegable duty to provide her with a seaworthy 

vessel upon which to work and live free from crewmembers with a disposition to commit sexual 

assault and/or sexual harassment.

91. Defendant breached the foregoing duty by failing to provide Plaintiff with a 

seaworthy vessel on which to work and live. Defendant ‘s vessel Apex was unseaworthy due to :

a. An inadequate crew -- particularly the security personnel -- which was understaffed 

and deficient in number and in training;

b. Having crewmembers with a disposition and proclivity for assaulting people such 

that the ship becomes a perilous workplace;

c. The unsafe practice of refusing to permit crewmembers to receive medical 

treatment in the United States where the crewmembers could receive prompt, adequate, and 

complete medical treatment;

d. The unsafe practice of sending seriously ill/injured crewmembers back to their

home countries, where they cannot receive necessary medical treatment, to save money; and

e. The presence of dangerous, violent, and aggressive male crewmembers who are 

permitted to sexually assault or sexually harass female crewmembers with impunity.

Case 1:22-cv-21678-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/01/2022 Page 19 of 24
Page | 20

92. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s breach of the foregoing legal duties 

and the unseaworthiness of its vessel, Plaintiff suffered harm, including but not limited to, bodily 

injury, mental pain and suffering, mental anguish, emotional distress, loss of capacity for the 

enjoyment of life, physical disability and impairment, inconvenience in the normal pursuits and 

pleasures of life, feelings of economic insecurity caused by her disability, aggravation of any 

previously existing conditions, medical expenses in the care and treatment of her injuries,

including psychiatric care and medications, lost wages, income lost in the past, and her working

ability and earning capacity has been impaired. These losses, injuries, and damages are either 

permanent or continuing in nature, and Plaintiff will suffer these losses, injuries, and damages in 

the future.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Zyra Cayanga demands judgment against Defendant Celebrity 

Cruise Lines, Ltd. for compensatory damages, together with costs, interest, prejudgment interest, 

and any other relief this Court deems appropriate. Plaintiff demands a jury trial on all issues.

COUNT VI

FAILURE TO PROVIDE PROMPT, ADEQUATE, AND 

COMPLETE MEDICAL TREATMENT UNDER THE JONES ACT

93. Plaintiff adopts and realleges paragraphs 1 through 63 as if fully set forth herein, and 

further alleges:

94. Defendant had an absolute and nondelegable duty under the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C. 

30104, to provide its crewmembers, including Plaintiff, with prompt, adequate, and complete 

medical care and treatment for injuries sustained while in the service of the Apex.

95. Plaintiff sustained serious illness/injuries while in the service of the Apex .

96. Defendant failed to provide prompt, adequate, and complete medical care and

treatment for Plaintiff’s serious illness/injuries by:

Case 1:22-cv-21678-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/01/2022 Page 20 of 24
Page | 21

a. Failing to promptly and adequately diagnose Plaintiff’s medical condition;

b. Failing to promptly and adequately treat Plaintiff’s injuries;

c. Failing to prescribe appropriate medications and therapy to Plaintiff;

d. Failing to schedule Plaintiff with qualified and appropriate medical care and

treatment;

e. Failing to refer Plaintiff ashore promptly for medical evaluation, including

appropriate diagnostic tests or procedures;

f. Failing to provide Plaintiff with prompt, full and complete medical care and 

treatment;

g. Failing to promptly arrange and pay for required medical care and treatment when 

such care and treatment was medically necessary and directly related to the serious illness/injuries 

Plaintiff sustained while in the service of the Apex;

h. Failing to arrange for appropriate laboratory tests and other diagnostic tests;

i. Failing to involve appropriate medical experts in Plaintiff’s medical care and 

treatment; and

j. Failing to involve appropriate rehabilitation experts in Plaintiff’s case to facilitate 

her recovery.

97. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s failure to provide Plaintiff with

prompt, adequate, and complete medical care, Plaintiff sustained additional illness/injuries,

prolonged and delayed recovery, additional pain and suffering, mental anguish, depression,

disability, lost wages, and loss of earning capability and earning capacity.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Zyra Cayanga demands judgment against Defendant Celebrity 

Cruise Lines, Ltd. for compensatory damages, together with costs, interest, prejudgment interest, 

Case 1:22-cv-21678-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/01/2022 Page 21 of 24
Page | 22

and any other relief this Court deems appropriate. Plaintiff demands a jury trial on all issues.

COUNT VII

FAILURE TO TIMELY PROVIDE ENTIRE

MAINTENANCE AND CURE UNDER GENERAL MARITIME LAW

98. Plaintiff adopts and realleges paragraphs 1 through 63 as if fully set forth herein, and 

further alleges:

99. Plaintiff sustained illness/injuries while serving as a member of the crew on the 

Apex.

100. Pursuant to General Maritime Law, Plaintiff is entitled to receive prompt, adequate, 

and complete maintenance and cure from Defendant until she reaches MMI for the medical 

condition in question, as determined by a qualified medical doctor. This maintenance and cure 

includes, among other things, sick wages, lodging expenses, food, beverages, living expenses, 

travel to and from healthcare providers, medical care and treatment, therapy, medication,

rehabilitation, and other medical services and expenses.

100. Defendant purposefully refused to arrange and pay for timely, adequate, and

complete medical cure despite its knowledge that such cure is legally required and necessary for 

the support and medical treatment of Plaintiff. Defendant failed to meet its maintenance and cure 

obligations by:

a. Referring Plaintiff to medical facilities that serve to protect the financial interests 

of Defendant, which led to inadequate and incomplete medical treatment;

b. Failing to pay Plaintiff all her actual daily living expenses and all her medical cure;

c. Ignoring and/or unreasonably delaying in responding to Plaintiff’s attempts to 

obtain prompt, adequate, and complete maintenance and cure;

d. Unreasonably delaying payment for Plaintiff’s maintenance and sick wages and

Case 1:22-cv-21678-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/01/2022 Page 22 of 24
Page | 23

paying an amount which was inadequate;

d. Refusing to reimburse Plaintiff for the medical expenses, medication, travel 

expenses, lodging, food, beverages, toiletries, and otherliving expenses which Plaintiff incurred;

e. Failing to authorize rehabilitative therapies to permit Plaintiff to engage in normal 

life functions;

f. Hiring incompetent and unqualified doctors who performed negligent medicine; 

g. Failing to involve appropriate rehabilitation experts in Plaintiff’s case to 

facilitate her recovery;

h. Sending Plaintiff back to her home country, when she needed extensive 

professional treatment, and then abandoning her;

i. Refusing to arrange for the involvement of appropriate experts necessary to treat a 

rape victim;

j. Investigating the rape solely to protect Defendant’s legal and financial interests

rather than focusing on Plaintiff’s medical condition; and

k. Delegating its nondelegable maintenance and cure obligations to a third party that

was unable to arrange competent medical care.

101. Plaintiff was required to retain undersigned counsel to assert her rights and to obtain 

what Defendant failed and refused to arrange, provide, and pay for to date and in the future.

102 Due to Defendant’s foregoing acts and omissions, Plaintiff incurred maintenance

and medical expenses and has become obligated to pay the undersigned a reasonable attorney’s

fee.

103. Defendant’s wrongful failure to provide Plaintiff with the prompt, adequate, and 

complete maintenance and cure to which she is entitled to was and is willful, arbitrary, capricious

Case 1:22-cv-21678-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/01/2022 Page 23 of 24
Page | 24

and in total disregard of Plaintiff’s rights as a seaman.

104. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s failure to provide Plaintiff with

prompt, adequate, and complete medical care, Plaintiff sustained additional illness/injuries,

prolonged and delayed recovery, additional pain and suffering, mental anguish, depression,

disability, lost wages, and loss of earning capability and earning capacity.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Zyra Cayanga demands judgment against Defendant Celebrity 

Cruise Lines, Ltd. for compensatory and punitive damages, together with costs, interest, 

prejudgment interest, and any other relief this Court deems appropriate. Plaintiff demands a jury 

trial on all issues.

REQUEST FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff Zyra Cayanga is entitled to and requests trial by jury on all issues and all 

counts alleged in this Complaint.

Dated: June 1, 2022 

Respectfully submitted,

By: /s/Julio J. Ayala

Julio J. Ayala, Esq

Crewmember & Maritime Advocacy Center

1100 Catalonia Ave.

Coral Gables, Florida 33134

Tel: (305) 374-9099

Fax: (305) 374-5099

Florida Bar No. 0977070 

crewesq@crewadvocacy.com

Case 1:22-cv-21678-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/01/2022 Page 24 of 24