1.INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW 1
2.THE CONTEXT OF RECENT POLICY DEVELOPMENTS 3
2.1.Notable shipping incidents 3
2.2.The regulatory response 5
2.2.1.The response from the International Maritime Organization 5
2.2.1.1.The IMO Guidelines on places of refuge for ships in need of assistance 5
2.2.1.2.The rejection by the IMO Legal Committee of a treaty initiative 7
2.2.2.The response from regional organisations 9
2.2.2.1.The EU VTMIS Directive 9
2.2.2.2.Operational agreements within regional coastal State organisations 12
2.2.3.The response from States 13
2.3.Uncertainty about international law on the accommodation of ships in need of assistance in places of refuge 14
3.CURRENT INTERNATIONAL LAW ON THE ACCOMMODATIONOFSHIPS IN DISTRESS IN PLACES OF REFUGE 17
3.1.Methodology and classification of relevant legal sources 17
3.2.Summary of the right of access under customary law 21
3.3.Conventions 26
3.3.1.The International Regime of Maritime Ports 26
3.3.2.The Geneva Territorial Sea Convention 28
3.3.2.1.Importance 28
3.3.2.2.State sovereignty 29
3.3.2.3.Instances of innocent passage 29
3.3.2.4.Stopping and anchoring in the territorial sea 30
3.3.2.5.Innocence of passage 33
3.3.2.6.Measures by coastal States 34
3.3.2.7.Meaning of French"relache forcee" 36
3.3.2.8.Ships already distressed before entering the territorial sea 37
3.3.2.9.Laws and regulations of the coastal State 39
3.3.2.10.Suspension of innocent passage 40
3.3.2.11.Charges levied upon ships 40
3.3.2.12.Conclusion 40
3.3.3.The UN Law of the Sea Convention 41
3.3.3.1.General scope of the Convention 41
3.3.3.2.Overview of relevant rules 42
3.3.3.3.State sovereignty 42
3.3.3.4.Instances of innocent passage 42
3.3.3.5.Stopping and anchoring in the territorial sea 44
3.3.3.6.Innocence of passage 47
3.3.3.7.Laws and regulations of the coastal State 49
3.3.3.8.Measures by coastal States 49
3.3.3.9.The International Law Association's position on casualty ships 52
3.3.3.10.Suspension of innocent passage 55
3.3.3.11.Charges levied upon ships 56
3.3.3.12.Duty to render assistance 57
3.3.3.13.Protection of the marine environment 58
3.3.3.14.Enforcement immunity of ships in distress 61
3.3.3.15.Conclusion 61
3.3.4.The Intervention Convention 62
3.3.5.The London Salvage Convention 68
3.3.6.Other relevant multilateral conventions 70
3.3.7.Bilateral friendship,commerce and navigation treaties 74
3.3.8.Treaties on international waterways 77
3.4.Case law 78
3.4.1.Significance and selection 78
3.4.2.The Eleanor(1809) 79
3.4.3.The Schooner Exchange(1812) 80
3.4.4.The New York(1818) 81
3.4.5.The North Atlantic Coast Fisheries Case(1910) 81
3.4.6.The Rebecca(1929) 82
3.4.7.The Stanislaw Dubois(1981) 83
3.4.8.Poulsen(The Onkel Sam)(1992) 85
3.4.9.The Frontier(1992) 86
3.4.10.The Toledo(1995) 87
3.4.11.The Long Lin(1995) 90
3.4.12.Synthesis 93
3.5.The IMO Guidelines on places of refuge for ships in need of assistance 94
3.6.European law 99
3.6.1.European Union Law 99
3.6.2.Other regional European law 109
3.7.National regulations and administrative practice 111
3.8.General principles of law 117
3.9.Legal doctrine 117
3.9.1.Classification of available material 117
3.9.2.Legal doctrine tending towards an absolute right of entry 121
3.9.3.Legal doctrine tending towards a qualified right of entry 132
3.9.4.Legal doctrine tending towards an absolute right of refusal 140
3.9.5.Viewpoints in some recent in-depth studies 141
3.9.5.1.Hydeman and Berman(1960) 141
3.9.5.2.Devine(1991 and 1996) 143
3.9.5.3.Lagoni(1988 and 2001) 144
3.9.5.4.Van Hooydonk(2003) 145
3.9.5.5.Somers(2004) 148
3.9.5.6.Chircop(2006) 149
3.9.5.7.Gadow-Stephani(2006) 151
3.9.5.8.Nordquist(2007) 152
3.9.5.9.Ringbom(2008) 154
3.10.Synthesis and attempt at elucidation 155
3.10.1.The state of international law 155
3.10.2.Present-day relevance of the right of entry 156
3.10.3.The need for a precise delineation of the right of refusal 162
3.10.3.1.Legal uncertainty in respect of the foundations and outlines of the right of refusal 162
3.10.3.2.First position:refusal of entry on the basis of"circumstances precluding wrongfulness" 164
3.10.3.3.Second position:refusal of entry integrated into the primary legal regime of the accommodation of ships in distress 167
3.10.3.4.Conclusion:the customary law outlines of the right of refusal of entry and the powers of judicial review 170
3.11.Towards a codification of a presumption of entry and principles of good administration 177
4.THE GENESIS,NECESSITY AND STATUS OF THE CMI DRAFT CONVENTION 179
4.1.Genesis of the CMI Draft Convention 179
4.1.1.CMI activities before the Athens Conference 179
4.1.2.The CMI Conference in Athens 180
4.2.Necessity of the CMI Draft Convention 182
4.2.1.Demonstration of a"compelling need" 182
4.2.2.Absence of well-founded objections to a treaty regulation 187
4.3.Status of the CMI Draft Convention 191
4.3.1."Draft Instrument"or"Draft Convention"? 191
4.3.2.Relationship between the CMI Draft Convention and other sources of law 192
4.3.2.1.A distinction based on the current status of the instrument 192
4.3.2.2.The CMI Draft Convention as a codification instrument adopted by an NGO 192
4.3.2.3.The CMI Draft Convention after its entry into force as an international treaty 195
4.3.2.3.1.Relation to national law 195
4.3.2.3.2.Relation to other international instruments 196
4.3.2.3.3.Relation to European Union law 198
5.CONTENT OF THE CMI DRAFT CONVENTION 203
5.1.Structure of the CMI Draft Convention 203
5.2.Analysis of the preamble 203
5.2.1.First recital:the importance of the availability of places of refuge 204
5.2.2.Second recital:the necessity of taking into account all interests involved 204
5.2.3.Third recital:the necessity of a clarification of the international liability regime 205
5.2.4.Fourth recital:uncertainty regarding the right of access under customary law 206
5.2.5.Fifth recital:reference to IMO instruments 207
5.2.6.Sixth recital:the need for a legally binding instrument regarding the granting or refusal of entry to ships in need of assistance 209
5.2.7.Seventh recital:purpose of the CMI Draft Convention 209
5.3.Analysis of the material provisions 211
5.3.1.Article 1:Definitions 211
5.3.1.1.General tenor 211
5.3.1.2.The notion of a"ship" 211
5.3.1.3.The notion of a"ship in need of assistance" 214
5.3.1.4.The notion of a"place of refuge" 224
5.3.1.5.The notion of a"competent authority" 227
5.3.1.6.The notion of an"assessment" 232
5.3.1.7.The notion of a"ship owner" 234
5.3.1.8.The notion of a"registered owner" 235
5.3.2.Article 2:Object and purpose 235
5.3.3.Article 3:Legal obligation to grant access to a place of refuge 237
5.3.3.1.Three alternative wordings 237
5.3.3.2.The obligation in principle to grant access 237
5.3.3.3.First option:refusal of access on grounds of a risk assessment 240
5.3.3.4.Second option:refusal of access on grounds of a risk assessment and taking into account financial securities 246
5.3.3.5.Third option:refusal of access on grounds of a risk assessment or the absence of financial securities 248
5.3.3.6.Relationship to international customary law concerning access to places of refuge 250
5.3.3.7.The obligation to seek alternative solutions 253
5.3.3.8.Reservation regarding the competent authority's right to make a claim for salvage 256
5.3.4.Article 4:Immunity from liability where access is granted reasonably 259
5.3.5.Article 5:Liability to another State,a third party,the ship owner or salvor where refusal of access is unreasonable 265
5.3.5.1.Scope of the liability 265
5.3.5.2.Right to sue 270
5.3.5.3.Liable authorities 272
5.3.5.4.Burden of proof 273
5.3.5.5.Breach of duty on the part of the competent authority under the marine pollution liability conventions 279
5.3.6.Article 6:Reasonable conduct 282
5.3.7.Article 7:Guarantees 287
5.3.7.1.The necessity of a regulation 287
5.3.7.2.First option:limitation of financial security to a reasonable amount not exceeding the LLMC limit for property claims 292
5.3.7.3.Second option:limitation of financial security to a reasonable amount not exceeding the LLMC limit for property claims and a reasonable additional amount for wreck removal 307
5.3.7.4.Third option:limitation of the financial security to a reasonable amount 308
5.3.8.Article 8:Plans to accommodate ships in need of assistance 309
5.3.9.Article 9:Identification of competent authority 313
5.4.Matters not regulated by the CMI Draft Convention 315
6.COMPARISON OF THE CMI DRAFT CONVENTION WITH THE EUROPEAN REGIME OF PLACES OF REFUGE 323
6.1.Similarities 323
6.2.Differences 324
7.THE FURTHER ROLE OF THE CMI DRAFT CONVENTION 327
7.1.Discussion as a draft convention by the Legal Committee of the International Maritime Organization 327
7.2.Possible impact on international customary law,regional regulations,operational decision-making and case law 329
8.CONCLUSIONS 331
8.1.Current state of international law 331
8.2.Significance of the CMI Draft Convention 331
9.APPENDICES 333
9.1.CMI documents 333
9.1.1.The CMI Draft Instrument 333
9.1.1.1.CMI Draft Instrument on Places of Refuge(final version of 17 October 2008) 333
9.1.1.2.Resolution adopted by the 39th CMI Conference in connection with the Draft Instrument on Places of Refuge-Athens 17 October 2008 337
9.1.2.Other CMI documents 337
9.1.2.1.Draft version of the CMI Draft Instrument on Places of Refuge as submitted to the CMI Cape Town Colloquium(2006) 337
9.1.2.2.Draft version of the CMI Draft Instrument on Places of Refuge as submitted to the CMI Athens Conference(2008) 341
9.1.2.3.Final Report of the CMI to the Legal Committee of the IMO(IMO Doc.LEG 95/9,23 January 2009) 346
9.2.IMO Documents 356
9.2.1.IMO Guidelines on places of refuge for ships in need of assistance 356
9.2.2.IMO Guidelines on the control of ships in an emergency 364
9.2.3.Report of the Legal Committee on the work of its ninety-fifth session(IMO Doc.LEG 95/10,22 April 2009)(excerpt) 369
9.3.EU Documents 370
9.3.1.Directive 2002/59/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2002 establishing a Community vessel traffic monitoring and information system and repealing Council Directive 93/75/EEC 370
9.3.2.European Parliament Resolution on improving safety at sea in response to the Prestige accident(2003/2066(INI)) 387
9.3.3.Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2002/59/EC establishing a Community vessel traffic monitoring and information system(COM/2005/0589 final) 396
9.3.4.Directive 2009/17/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 amending Directive 2002/59/EC establishing a Community vessel traffic monitoring and information system 418
9.3.5.Consolidated version of Directive 2002/59/EC establishing a Community vessel traffic monitoring and information system 433
9.4.Summary of international law regimes of ships in need of assistance 459
Index 461