Ship-source Oil Pollution Research Articles

Legal advice on the Chinese compensatory fund system for oil pollution damage caused by ships from the perspective of marine environmental governance

As one of the primary obstructive factors for marine environmental governance, the frequent occurrence of oil pollution damage caused by ships has resulted in the establishment of compensation funds, such as the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund of the United States, Ship Oil Pollution Fund of Canada and International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund (IOPC). Frequently suffering from marine oil pollution, China has extended considerable effort in marine environmental governance. Following the introduction of the ‘green principle’ into the Civil Code, China attached increasing significance to the legislation including compensation for oil pollution damage caused by ships. China formally established a compensation fund in 2012, and the past decade has witnessed the burgeoning development of the Chinese Ship-source Oil Pollution Compensation Fund (CSOPC), in addition to several defects which impede the fund from achieving the goal of marine environmental governance. As a national fund that is independent of the IOPC, the CSOPC adopts several regulations that are distinctive from internationally recognized practice; for instance, not recognizing pure economic loss within the scope of compensation. Such unique parameters, though partially originating from the national conditions in China, have resulted in glaring defects, including incomplete compensation scope and inappropriate compensation measures. Given the above problems, this study endeavours to provide several legal recommendations from the perspective of macro policies for improving the top-level design of the system, enhancing oil pollution compensation capabilities, and promoting the internationalization process. The study proposes two potential regulatory paths for innovation; namely, enlarging the range of compensation and establishing an essential emergency fund. From the perspective of protecting the rights of the victims of oil pollution damage and safeguarding the public interests of the ocean, this study puts forward relevant legal suggestions, which are expected to make valuable contributions to improving the compensation system for oil pollution damage caused by ships in China and promoting the governance of the marine environment.

Assessing the impacts of Sanchi incident on Chinese law concerning ship-source oil pollution

The Sanchi oil spill incident occurred in East China Sea, in terms of the amount spilt, is the largest in China and ninth in the world so far. The existing studies show that the current legal regime on ship-source oil pollution is largely pushed forward by a few disastrous incidents. Accordingly, this paper presumes that the Sanchi incident significantly promoted Chinese law concerning ship-source oil pollution. However, after looking into the development, particularly the recent improvements of China's legal system in this regard, we find that: 1) China has already proactively established its legal framework on ship-source oil pollution before Sanchi incident along with the growing volume of oil import; 2) only a few pieces of legislations on preventing and reducing oil spills are directly triggered by the Sanchi incident; and 3) the factors including compliance with international treaties, China's long-term legislation plans, reform of the central governance, and others, have additionally prompted China to update its legal framework in the aftermath of Sanchi incident. Furthermore, we identify that some legal issues demonstrated by the Sanchi incident remain unresolved, as follows: 1) China still lacks adequate capabilities in many respects to respond to the open sea oil spills; 2) a clear action plan is necessary for China to enhance international and regional cooperation; and 3) the amount of funds available under China's own compensation law is inadequate. Therefore, it is recommended that China should learn from the Sanchi incident to enhance capacity building on emergency response to open sea oil spill, to promote international and regional cooperation for combating oil pollution, and to level up the compensation standards for tanker oil pollution.

Combating of oil spills by funding of oil spill preparedness vs funding for compensation after the spill events

• The total volume of oil spilled and the number of spills has declined significantly over the past forty years. However, oil spills are no longer considered as an unavoidable. The ship source oil pollution still remains a potentially important risk to the local economies and the marine environment which can cause major economic loss and severe damages to the coastal and marine environment. The international regulatory framework to deal with liability and compensation for ship source oil pollution has evolved over the past three decades. The available international legal regime for oil pollution liability and compensation is playing a great role in governing the discharge of oil into the sea by ensuring liability for polluters and compensation for victims of pollution. Despite the fact that the total cost of the oil spill cannot be compensated through the available international civil liability regime and entire damages caused to the marine environment cannot be compensated or recovered. This paper examined the application and limitations of available liability and compensation mechanisms for the protection of marine pollution and compares the benefit of the establishment of a funding mechanism for the strengthening of the level of oil spill preparedness and the civil liability regime for the protection of the coastal and marine environment. In addition, this paper reviews the funding mechanism adopted by the countries to strengthen a level of oil spill preparedness taken into account the polluter pays principle without putting the extra burden to general taxpayers. The establishment of a system for the funding of oil spill preparedness using the polluter pay principle has immensely helped to improve the oil spill response capabilities and protection of the marine environment of coastal states which adopted a unique funding mechanism by applying the polluter pay principle. This paper recommends among other things, review the available compensation and liability regime for the protection of the marine environment and recommend to adopt and apply a uniform funding mechanism for the strengthening of the level of oil spill preparedness taken into account the polluter pay principle for the protection of the marine environment and improve the status quo. • Liability, compensation, Preparedness, Polluters pay principle

United States and Canada Transboundary Oil Spill Liability and Compensation Regimes: An Overview

Abstract # —1141278 — In 2018, the Canadian government purchased the Trans Mountain pipeline, running from Alberta to British Columbia, along with the plans for expansion. The expansion could triple the transport capacity from 300,000 to 890,000 barrels of oil per day, and would increase the tanker traffic in the inland waterways of the Salish Sea, an area known for its sensitive marine habitat, and narrow, difficult to navigate passages. The anticipated increase in tanker traffic in this busy waterway continues to raise concerns about the impact of an oil spill and the financial means to address related injuries, particularly to natural resources. The transboundary nature of any spill further complicates the situation vis-à-vis the applicable liability regimes and response resources. Under the Canada-United States Joint Marine Contingency Plan (“JCP”), the United States Coast Guard and Canadian Coast Guard acknowledge each country's responsibility to fund their own response actions and pursue reimbursement of those costs within their respective jurisdictions. The availability of funding for a response, and to compensate injured parties, however, including the limits of liability of the responsible party, differs under each regime, and could impact the nature and scope of a response. For spills into or posing a substantial threat to the navigable waters of the United States, the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 governs and a national fund, the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund (“OSLTF”), is immediately available to address an incident, including emergency restoration to natural resources. Canada's Marine Liability Act enables the Ship-source Oil Pollution Fund (“SOPF”) to pay claimants who have incurred damages as a result of oil pollution. Both countries' funds operate under the same principal—the polluter pays—but the compensation structure, and claims processes and procedures are entirely different. This paper provides an overview of these funding sources and claims procedures, comparing and contrasting the different systems. The discussion is meant to provide an overall understanding of potential funding pools available for spill responses under each scheme in order to facilitate transboundary spill planning and discussion.

Compulsory civil liability insurance, financial security: An integral component of compensation for ship-source oil pollution damage

Oil pollution damage caused by oil spills at sea generally occurs on a large scale across numerous regions and countries, causing significant harm to marine ecosystems as well as worldwide economic loss. The costs are so severe in many instances that the owner of the ship responsible for the pollution cannot afford to pay compensation to those who have suffered loss. As a consequence, the need to cover oil pollution damages has given rise to compulsory liability insurance, which provides a financial guarantee against the costs of oil spills. Compulsory civil liability insurance has therefore become an indispensable part of the liability regime for owners of oil tankers and bunkers.

Civil liability for ship -source oil pollution damage: should Vietnam join FUND 1992?

ABSTRACT Currently, international civil liability law has three tiers of compensation for damage caused by ship-source oil pollution, based on The International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage 1992 (CLC 1992), The International Convention on the Establishment of an International Fund for Compensation for Oil Pollution Damage 1992 Fund 1992 (FUND 1992) and The Supplementary Fund Protocol. Currently, Vietnam only participated in CLC 1992, so the Vietnamese legal framework for civil liability for harm caused by ships-source oil pollution has been significantly strengthened. However, the compensation for damages is not really consistent with the actual damage that occurred. Besides, the oil spill in Vietnam’s waters is fairly large, for many reasons. Thus, the question arises whether or not Vietnam should join FUND 1992. Based on the analysis of the additions of FUND 1992 compared to CLC 1992, as well as the actual situation, the legal system, the economy of Vietnam, the author will point out the advantages and disadvantages when Vietnam joined FUND 1992.

“Seas of risk”: Assessing the threats to colonial-nesting seabirds in Eastern Canada

This study presents the results of the first broad-scale, spatial cumulative impact analysis (SCIA) conducted for colonial-nesting seabirds at-sea in eastern Canada. Species distribution models, based on at-sea tracking data for thirteen species/groups of seabirds (n = 520 individuals), were applied to over 5000 species-specific colonies to map relative abundance patterns across the entire region. This information was combined with distributional data for a number of key anthropogenic threats to quantify exposure to fisheries, light and ship-source oil pollution, and marine traffic. As a final step, information about species-specific sensitivity to each threat was integrated to compute region-wide cumulative risk.The data products permit the visualization of the interaction between species and threats, and confirm that large portions of the coastal zones of Nova Scotia and Newfoundland, as well as the Grand Banks shelf break, constitute areas where breeding seabirds experience the highest potential impact. The cumulative risk maps revealed that species which were either widespread throughout coastal areas (e.g., gulls), or capable of foraging long distance (Leach's Storm-Petrel), were most at risk. Cumulative risk maps help identify appropriate and potentially effective management and conservation actions, and are of value to federal regulators responsible for managing cumulative effects as part of the new Canadian Impact Assessment Act. They also can assist marine planners achieve the Aichi marine conservation targets as specified by the Convention on Biodiversity. By filling a knowledge gap for a large potion of the northwest Atlantic, these results help to counter the “shifting baselines syndrome”.

The best way to the protection of the marine environment from oil spills impacts is the strengthening of available oil spill liability and compensation regimes or the funding of oil spill preparedness and strengthening of oil spill combat capabilities

The total volume of oil spilled and the number of spills has declined significantly over the past forty years. However, oil spills are no longer considered as an unavoidable. The ship source oil pollution still remains a potentially important risk to the local economies and the marine environment which can cause major economic loss and severe damages to the coastal and marine environment. The international regulatory framework to deal with liability and compensation in the event of ship source oil pollution has evolved over the past three decades. The available international legal regime for oil pollution liability and compensation is playing a great role in governing a discharge of oil into the sea by ensuring liability for polluters and compensation for victims of pollution. Despite the fact that the total cost of the oil spill cannot be compensated through the available international civil liability regime and entire damages caused to the marine environment cannot be compensated or recovered. This paper examined the application and limitations of available liability and compensation mechanism for the protection marine pollution and compare the benefit of the establishment of a funding mechanism for the strengthening of the level of oil spill preparedness and the civil liability regime for the protection of the coastal and marine environment. In addition, this paper reviews the funding mechanism adopted by the countries to the strengthening the level of oil spill preparedness taken into account the polluter pays principle without a putting extra burden for the general taxpayers. The establishment of a system for the funding of oil spill preparedness using the polluter pay principle has immensely helped to improve the oil spill response capabilities and protection of the marine environment of coastal states which adopted a unique funding mechanism by applying the polluter pay principle. This paper recommends the among other thing review the available compensation and liability regime for the protection of the marine environment and recommend to adopt and apply a uniform funding mechanism for the strengthening of the level of oil spill preparedness taken into account the polluter pay principle for the protection of the marine environment and improve the status quo.

THE INTERNATIONAL LAW REGARDING SHIP-SOURCE POLLUTION LIABILITY AND COMPENSATION: EVOLUTION AND CURRENT CHALLENGES

THE INTERNATIONAL LAW REGARDING SHIP-SOURCE POLLUTION LIABILITY AND COMPENSATION: EVOLUTION AND CURRENT CHALLENGES

China's 2012 Regime for Compensation for Vessel Source Oil Pollution: A Comparative Study

The International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund is a successful international scheme providing supplementary compensation for vessel source oil pollution damage. Some domestic schemes such as the Ship-Source Oil Pollution Fund in Canada and the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund in the United States have also been successful. China established its Vessel-Source Oil Pollution Compensation Fund in July 2012. This article examines the international and domestic schemes that provide supplementary compensation for vessel source oil pollution and makes some suggestions for amendment of the newly established Chinese national compensation fund.

Twenty years of Belgian North Sea aerial surveillance: A quantitative analysis of results confirms effectiveness of international oil pollution legislation

Over the years many policy measures have been taken to prevent illegal oil discharges from ships, like the MARPOL 73/78 Convention (1983) and the Bonn Agreement (1969/1983). However, the number of discharges remained high, leading to chronic oiling of seabirds and sensitive coastlines, therefore further measures were taken. The aim of this study is to quantify the effectiveness of two key legislative regulations: the IMO-designation of the North Sea as MARPOL Special Area which took effect in 1999, and the adoption of the EU Directive on Port Reception Facilities in 2000. Under study is the heavily navigated Belgian Surveillance Area, monitored since 1991, characterised by shallow waters with ecologically important sandbanks. The aerial surveillance data from 1991 to 2010 show a stepwise decrease in ship-source oil pollution. Three time periods can be distinguished with two turning points coinciding with the actual implementation of these key legislative measures, confirming their effectiveness.

The law and economics of pollution damage arising from carriage of oil by sea

Private law plays an important and indispensable role in the effort to tackle ship-source oil pollution, in which the Civil Liability Convention (CLC) is the key regime setting out the liability and compensation framework for oil spills. In attempting to evaluate the law to determine whether it should be improved, the paper employs a law and economics approach to examine the desirability of strict liability and limitation of liability which are two hallmarks of the CLC. The theoretical framework of economic analysis of accident law is first presented followed by the argument that a single oil spill accident can be viewed as having both unilateral and bilateral features depending on the type of damage. The paper suggests that the available theories in the economic analysis of accident law are not tailor-made to suit marine pollution issues and therefore, in applying the theories to oil spill problems, modifications must be made. Based on the above, it is submitted first that strict liability with certain defences as set out in the CLC is desirable for dealing with oil spills. Limitation of liability should not only focus on whether or not the regime should be retained, but should be considered in relation to different kinds of damage. It is therefore proposed that a two-fold liability regime be established for marine oil spills.

"Seabirds and Atlantic Canada's Ship-Source Oil Pollution" by F.Wiese [book review

"Seabirds and Atlantic Canada's Ship-Source Oil Pollution" by F.Wiese [book review

"Seabirds and Atlantic Canada's Ship-Source Oil Pollution" by F. Wiese. 2002. [book review

"Seabirds and Atlantic Canada's Ship-Source Oil Pollution" by F. Wiese. 2002. [book review

The problem of pure economic loss in the law relating to ship-source oil pollution damage

The discrepancy between some decisions of British courts and a number of decisions of the IOPC Funds raises a few interesting points, in particular the likelihood that there will be discrepancies between — on the one hand — decisions emanating from national courts implementing national legislation, in particular where courts in one state decide to apply general domestic law to the national law implementing the international conventions, and — on the other hand — courts in other states which may give a quasijudicial status to the decisions of the IOPC Fund and follow such rulings. This is a problem which may be very hard to solve. One solution may be the creation of an international adjudicating tribunal with exclusive jurisdiction to deal with claims for shipsource oil pollution damage.However, it is probably early days for states to be asked to give up their jurisdiction in relation to this subject. Another solution which has been suggested is for courts in States that are parties to CLC and the Fund Convention to attribute persuasive value to decisions of the IOPC Fund Executive Committee and Assembly. However, the latter suggestion is more illusory than real, because it is not compatible with principles of fairness and natural justice; effectively, it means the grant of the status of precedent to decisions of one of the parties to a litigation. Another possibility — which only partly solves the problem — is for the courts in one State to give at least persuasive value to decisions of courts in another State party to the Convention.

Civil liability for oil pollution damage: examining the evolving scope for environmental compensation in the international regime

The civil liability regime for ship-source oil pollution enables national victims of oil spill damage to make financial claims against domestic and non-domestic tanker owners and, in certain circumstances, the global oil cargo industry. This paper examines the evolving—and contested—parameters of environmental liability set by the international oil pollution liability conventions, focusing on the admissibility of reinstatement costs and the geographical scope of compensation norms. It concludes that although the liability regime can be applauded for its equitable consideration of environmental claims, this is restricted by a narrow definition of damage and national boundaries of entitlement. Oil pollution harm to collective ecological interests represents a key challenge to the liability framework.

Ship-Source Oil Pollution Fund: 20 Years of Canada's Experience1

ABSTRACT The Ship-source Oil Pollution Fund (SOPF) had its origins in amendments to the Canada Shipping Act passed in 1971. At that time, there was no legal right compensation available to recover the costs and expenses incurred as a result of two oil spill incidents on Canada's east coast. These amendments established the Maritime Pollution Claims Fund (MPCF), which was financed by a levy on every ton of oil imported or exported from Canada. Operational experience dictated further legislative changes in 1987. To strengthen Canada's legal regime in pollution cases, the oil MPCF was transformed into the SOPF, and Canada acceded to the 1969 Civil Liability Convention and the 1971 International Fund Convention. An additional level of compensation over that of the conventions, to a current maximum of Can$105.5 million per incident, was provided. The SOPF also meets claims not covered by the conventions, such as mystery spills, damage caused by ships other than laden tankers and claims beyond the territorial sea but in Canada's fishing zones. Speedy recourse is provided to fishermen so that they do not suffer undue hardship. A unique feature of the SOPF is that Canada's contributions to the International Fund are made directly by the SOPF and not by the individual oil companies. As of April 1990, the balance in the fund was some Can$164 million.

Ship-source oil pollution fund established in Canada

Ship-source oil pollution fund established in Canada

Ship source oil pollution damage: A Canadian perspective on recoverability of economic losses and damage to the marine environment

Ship source oil pollution damage: A Canadian perspective on recoverability of economic losses and damage to the marine environment