THE INTERNATIONAL REGIME GOVERNING COMPENSATION FOR TANKER OIL SPILLS

1
THE INTERNATIONAL REGIME GOVERNING COMPENSATION
FOR TANKER OIL SPILLS Måns Jacobsson Former
Director International Oil Pollution Compensation
Funds Baltic Master Political Committee
Meeting Copenhagen 27 April 2007
2
(No Transcript)
3

• INTERNATIONAL

COMPENSATION REGIMES
Old regime1969 Civil Liability
Convention/1971 Fund Convention1971 Fund New
regime 1992 Civil Liability Convention/1992
Fund Convention 1992 Fund 2003 Supplementary
Fund Protocol Supplementary Fund
4

• 1992 CIVIL LIABILITY CONVENTION
• 116 States Parties
• 1992 FUND CONVENTION
• 100 States Parties
• 2003 PROTOCOL TO 1992 FUND CONVENTION
• 20 States Parties

5
THE THREE TIER SYSTEM
Oil receivers after sea transport
Supplementary Fund Protocol
Supplementary Fund
THIRD TIER
SECOND TIER
Oil receivers after sea transport
1992 Fund Convention
1992 Fund
FIRST TIER
1992 Civil Liability Convention
Insurers
Shipowners
6
1992 CONVENTIONS APPLY TO

• Spills of persistent oil from tankers
• Pollution damage
• Preventive measures and clean-up

7
MAIN FEATURES

• Strict liability of registered owner
• Limitation of liability
• Compulsory insurance and direct action
• Jurisdiction and enforcement of judgements

8
FUND CONVENTION APPLIES

• Shipowner exempt
• Shipowner financially incapable of meeting
  obligations
• Damage exceeds the shipowners liability

9
MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF COMPENSATION

• 1992 CLC/Fund Conventions
• 203 million SDR (US 305 million)
• 2003 Supplementary Fund
• 750 million SDR (US 1 125 million)

10
LIMITS LAID DOWN IN THE CONVENTIONS
11
WHO CONTRIBUTES TO THE FUND

• Person receiving gt150 000 tons of contributing
  oil/year after sea transport
• Contributing oil crude oil and heavy fuel oil
• Contributions decided by Fund Assembly
• Oil receivers pay, not governments

12
(No Transcript)
13
The Haven incident, Italy, 1991
14
SOME MAJOR SPILLS INVOLVING THE FUNDS

• Antonio Gramsci (Sweden) 1979 US18 M
• Tanio (France) 1980 US36 M
• Haven (Italy) 1991 US58 M
• Aegean Sea (Spain) 1992 US65 M
• Braer (United Kingdom) 1993 US87 M
• Keumdong No 5 (Republic of Korea) 1993 US21 M
• Sea Prince (Republic of Korea) 1995 US40M
• Yuil No 1 (Republic of Korea) 1995 US30 M
• Sea Empress (United Kingdom) 1996 US60 M
• Nakhodka (Japan) 1997 US212 M
• Nissos Amorgos (Venezuela) 1997 US21 M
• Osung No 3 (Republic of Korea) 1997 US16 M
• Erika (France) (so far) 1999 US169 M
• Prestige (Spain, France and Portugal) (so
  far) 2002 US156 M

15
CLAIMS HANDLING

• Co-operation with insurer
• Local Claims Offices
• Use of experts
• Court actions

16
The Erika incident, France, 1999
17
MAIN TYPES OF CLAIM

• Property damage
• Clean-up operations and preventive measures
• Losses in fishery, mariculture and tourism
  sectors
• Consequential loss
• Pure economic loss
• Environmental damage

18
UNIFORM APPLICATION OF THE CONVENTIONS

• Essential for the functioning of the regime
• Equal treatment of claimants

19
CONCLUSIONS

• The international compensation regime has in
  general worked well
• Continuous increase in Member States
• 137 incidents in 28 years
• US 1 060 million paid to victims
• Used as model in other fields
• Reviewed to ensure it meets the needs of society
  in the 21st century

20
Prestige incident, Spain November 2002
The Prestige incident, Spain, 2002