Vessel classification dispute and financial hardship supported unconditional waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery.

Competing classifications of an imported vessel were central to interim relief, with the vessel consistently described by shipping and survey authorities as a passenger ship and no casino licence yet in place. Conflicting Tribunal decisions on whether such a vessel should be treated as a passenger vessel or as a casino vessel, together with the appellant's accumulated losses, supported a strong prima facie case and demonstrated financial hardship. On that basis, unconditional waiver of pre-deposit was granted and recovery was stayed during pendency of the appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to unconditional waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in view of the competing classifications of the imported vessel and the appellant's financial hardship.

Analysis: The vessel was consistently described in the record as a passenger ship by the competent shipping and survey authorities, and the appellant had also shown that the vessel had not yet obtained a licence to operate as a casino. The order noted conflicting Tribunal decisions on classification of a passenger vessel used as a casino. That conflict, together with the documentary description of the vessel and the appellant's accumulated losses, was sufficient to establish a strong prima facie case and financial hardship for interim relief.

Conclusion: Unconditional waiver of pre-deposit was granted and recovery was stayed during the pendency of the appeal.

---