In this thesis an overview of specific possibilities to secure a maritime claim available to claimants from all over the world, based on the legal regimes of arrest of ships in Norway and Ukraine, as well as on Rule B attachment is given. Due to the fact, that International Convention Relating to the Arrest of Sea-Going Ships (Brussels, May 10, 1952) was ratified by Norway, and not ratified by Ukraine, such analysis, I hope, will give to the reader an overview of possible complications, which can arise, when arrest of a ship is sought in a country party to Brussels convention and in a country, which is not. With respect to Norway specific attention will be paid to the issues of arrest of a ship, not owned by a debtor, as well as to the specific requirements of “arrest ground”. Regarding Ukraine, which has very unclear rules regarding arrest of ships, I intend to focus on specific problems, which the claimant can face and come with specific proposals regarding amendments to Ukrainian legislation in order to bring arrest rules in compliance with internationally recognized practice. Moreover, a brief legal analysis of Rule B attachment of EFTs will be made with a view to its advantages and disadvantages comparing to ship arrest, in order to provide the reader with a broader view on specific remedies, which are used to secure maritime claims nowadays.