All Posts in "Civil Liability Convention"

Civil Liability ConventionImmediately after the shock brought on by the Liberian tanker Torrey Canyon” accident in 1967 off the United Kingdom coastline, member States of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) established a particular international regime aiming at ensuring adequate compensation for victims of pollution harm brought on by oil spills from ships. Claims for compensation for oil pollution harm (which includes clean-up charges) may possibly be brought against the owner of the tanker which triggered the harm or directly against the owner’s P&I insurer. An attempt is being created to locate an authority which is prepared to issue 1969 CLC certificates in the exact same manner as the United Kingdom authority will issue 1992 CLC certificates for ships flying the flag of a 1969 flag state.

The 1969 CLC entered into force in 1975 and lays down the principle of strict liability (i.e. liability even in the absence of fault) for tanker owners and creates a program of compulsory liability insurance coverage. Practically nothing in this Convention shall have an effect on the right of the shipowner and the person or persons supplying insurance coverage or other economic security to limit liability under any applicable national or international regime, such as the Convention on Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims, 1976, as amended. The judgment of the Court of appeal of Paris was appealed in cassation by the convicted persons and 36 civil parties.

The International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund (1971 IOPC Fund) was set up for the purpose of administering the … Read the rest >>>

Joshua Brown by — November 30, 2015 in Civil Liability Convention

Civil Liability ConventionDisclaimer: IMO has endeavoured to make the data on this internet site as accurate as attainable but cannot take responsibility for any errors. B. that, where legally feasible in accordance with their national law, States Parties to the 1969 CLC accept CLC certificates issued by State Parties to the 1992 CLC as proof that a ship has insurance cover as required by the 1969 CLC. Note: The limits of liability below the a variety of regimes are primarily based on specified units of account (Particular Drawing Correct – SDR). Size is not relevant nor is there any provision in the Convention, as there is in some other conventions, such as the LLMC Convention in its art. These Parties that have not ratified the 1992 regime are nevertheless regarded Parties to CLC 1969.

Secondly, if, for example, the ship is bareboat chartered and pursuant to the charter celebration the owner is liable for bunker oil pollution harm — which would make sense, given that the owner is expected to preserve insurance or other economic safety to cover liability for pollution damage — claimants would nevertheless be entitled to bring a claim against the bareboat charterer, who apparently 17 is not expected to keep insurance coverage or financial security.

The outcome could be that exactly where the ship is bareboat chartered and its management is entrusted by the charterer to a manager, there would be 3 persons who need to keep insurance or other financial security, thereby tripling the insurance costs: a … Read the rest >>>

Joshua Brown by — October 27, 2015 in Civil Liability Convention

Civil Liability ConventionStarting this week, I will be posting primers on the different provisions of the Family members Code of the Philippines For this week, the primer is on the fundamental provisions on marriage, particularly Articles 1 to 34. Please surf more than to Title I, Articles 1 to 54 which comprise the comprehensive provisions of the Family members Code on marriage. The International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage (the Bunkers Convention) is adopted internationally. Compensation beneath the Fund Convention is supplied by oil cargo receivers in Contracting States and every contribution depends on individual import quantities. Its key functions are the similar as CLC 1969, but CLC 1992 differs in the amounts by which a shipowner may limit his liability. Panama has indicated that it would be ready to offer 1969 CLC certificates for 1992 CLC flag ships. The Protocol of 1984 to amend the CLC was aimed at increasing limits of liability.

The liability and compensation provisions in Component XVI of the Canada Shipping Act are transferred to the Marine Liability Act, Component 6. In Might 2003, a Supplementary (‘third tier’) Fund was established at the IMO by means of a Protocol that enhanced the quantity of obtainable compensation to around US$ 1 billion (including the amounts paid beneath the 1992 CLC and Fund Convention) in nations that are party to it.

So far as this Aspect applies, Articles 3, five and six, paragraph 10 of Post 7, and Write-up 8, of the Bunker Oil Convention … Read the rest >>>

Joshua Brown by — October 24, 2015 in Civil Liability Convention

Civil Liability ConventionIn addition, a detailed study of the Erika case reveals some of the rationale for several of the persistent capabilities of marine pollution liability regimes. Payments of compensation and the administrative costs of the 1971 IOPC Fund had been financed by contributions levied on companies in Fund Convention countries that received crude oil and heavy fuel oil after sea transport. The tanker owner is normally entitled to limit his liability to an amount which is linked to the tonnage of the tanker causing the pollution.

Secondly, if, for instance, the ship is bareboat chartered and pursuant to the charter party the owner is liable for bunker oil pollution damage — which would make sense, given that the owner is essential to retain insurance coverage or other monetary safety to cover liability for pollution damage — claimants would nonetheless be entitled to bring a claim against the bareboat charterer, who apparently 17 is not necessary to preserve insurance or economic security.

The ship-owner’s liability can only be exonerated if he proves that the damage resulted from acts of war or comparable force majeure circumstances, from wilful acts or omissions of a third party, or from negligence or other wrongful act of the authority responsible for the upkeep of navigational aids in the workout of its functions. Issued in accordance with the provisions of Report VII of the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Harm, 1969.

The result could be that where the ship is bareboat chartered and its management … Read the rest >>>

Joshua Brown by — October 15, 2015 in Civil Liability Convention

Civil Liability ConventionThe structure of this Convention three differs from that of the CLC due to the fact there are no provisions on the limitation of liability of the owner, nor is it complemented by a Fund Convention. The 1992 Fund Convention established the International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund 1992 (1992 Fund) to offer compensation for victims who are unable to receive full compensation beneath the Civil Liability Convention. NB: Because the advent of the 1992 Protocol it is no longer feasible for countries to ratify the 1969 Civil Liability Convention.

Due to the fact 1998, Parties to the 1992 Protocol ceased to be Parties to CLC 1969, simply because the new, revised Convention took its place. The actions introduced before the Courts of the US, which is not a Party to the IMO civil liability Conventions, have been in basic unsuccessful. The essential legal components of the international regime established by the 1992 CLC can be summarized as follows.

This Convention shall supersede any Convention in force or open for signature, ratification or accession at the date on which this Convention is opened for signature, but only to the extent that such Convention would be in conflict with it however, nothing in this article shall have an effect on the obligation of States Parties not party to this Convention arising below such Convention.

For ships carrying much more than 2 000 tonnes of oil as cargo in bulk, the shipowner is obliged to sustain insurance to cover his liability under the … Read the rest >>>

Joshua Brown by — September 18, 2015 in Civil Liability Convention