Table Of Contents:

List of Contributors v
Summary of Contents vii

List of Abbreviations xxix

Chapter 1 Introduction 1(10)

Michael Faure

Han Lixin

Shan Hongjun

1 Origin of this Book 1(1)

2 Defining the Problem 2(3)

2.1 Social Relevance 2(1)

2.2 Legal Relevance 3(1)

2.3 Comparative Research 3(1)

2.4 Recent Evolutions 4(1)

3 Methodology 5(2)

3.1 Focus 5(1)

3.2 Legal Multidisciplinary 5(1)

3.3 The Comparative Approach 6(1)

3.4 Empirical Research 7(1)

4 Topics 7(1)

4.1 Implementation of Conventions in Europe and China 7(1)

4.2 Critical Analysis of the Current Structures 7(1)

4.3 Alternative Routes of Compensation 8(1)

4.4 Prevention and Enforcement 8(1)

5 Framework of the Project 8(1)

6 Structure of the Presentation 9(1)

7 Contributors 9(1)

8 Acknowledgements 10(1)

References 10(1)

Part I General Issues in Prevention and Compensation of Marine Pollution Damage 11(110)

Chapter 2 Prevention and Compensation for Marine Pollution 13(28)

Wang Hui

1 Introduction 13(2)

2 Legal History 15(3)

3 Prevention 18(10)

3.1 General Overview of MARPOL 18(1)

3.2 Oil 19(1)

3.2.1 Discharge Standards in MARPOL Annex I 19(1)

3.2.2 Construction, Design and Equipment Standards 20(3)

3.3 Hazardous and Noxious Substances 23(1)

3.3.1 Definition of HNS 23(1)

3.3.2 Annex II 24(1)

3.3.2 Annex III 25(1)

3.4 Fuel 25(1)

3.5 Comparative Analysis 26(2)

4 Civil Liability 28(7)

4.1 Oil 28(1)

4.2 HNS Convention 29(2)

4.3 Bunker Convention 31(3)

4.4 Comparative Analysis 34(1)

5 A Critical Analysis 35(4)

5.1 Regulation versus Civil Liability 35(1)

5.2 Regulation 35(2)

5.3 Civil Liability 37(1)

5.4 Empirics 38(1)

6 Concluding Remarks 39(2)

References 40(1)

Chapter 3 Marine Pollution and the Right of Entry in Maritime Ports for Ships in Distress 41(14)

Eddy Somers

1 Introduction 41(1)

2 Maritime Port Concept 42(1)

3 The Right of Access 42(1)

4 A Right of Access to Maritime Ports is Generally Based on Conventional Agreement (or National Legislation or Regulations) 43(1)

5 Right of Access for Ships in Distress 44(5)

5.1 Multilateral Treaties 44(2)

5.2 Customary International Law 46(2)

5.3 No General Right of Access 48(1)

6 Distress, Force Majeure and Immunity 49(1)

7 Conclusion 50(5)

References 51(4)

Chapter 4 Lost Ecosystem Goods and Services as a Measure of Marine Damages 55(20)

James Boyd

1 Introduction 55(2)

2 Liability for Damages to Public Trust Natural Resources 57(2)

3 Current Damage Assessment Practices 59(1)

4 Ecosystem Services Assessment 60(12)

4.1 Ecological Endpoints 62(2)

4.2 Causality and Biophysical Production Functions 64(3)

4.3 From Physical to Economic Damages 67(3)

4.4 Economic Damage Indicators 70(2)

5 Conclusion 72(3)

References 73(2)

Chapter 5 Liability and Compensation for Environmental Damage Caused by Ship-Source Oil Pollution: Actionability of Claims 75(22)

Proshanto K. Mukherjee

1 Introduction 75(2)

2 Environmental Damage under the Convention Regime 77(4)

3 Locus Standi 81(12)

3.1 Property Rights or Proprietary Interest 82(2)

3.2 Public Trust Doctrine 84(1)

3.2.1 Principles of Trust Law 84(1)

3.2.2 Ancient Origins of the Doctrine 84(1)

3.2.3 Roots of the Doctrine in English Law 85(1)

3.2.4 Application of Public Trust Doctrine in Various States 86(1)

3.2.5 Application of the Public Trust Doctrine in the United States 87(1)

3.3 Parens Patriae 88(1)

3.4 Statutes and Case Law on Public Trust and Parens Patriae 89(3)

3.5 Locus Standi of Private Entities 92(1)

4 Summary and Conclusion 93(4)

References 94(3)

Chapter 6 Funds' Admissibility Criteria for Pure Economic Loss Claims versus British Judicial Stand: Complementary or Contradictory? 97(14)

Baris Soyer

1 Introduction 97(2)

2 Funds' Approach to Pure Economic Loss 99(3)

3 British Courts' Approach to Pure Economic Loss 102(3)

4 Relationship between the Funds' Admissibility Criteria and the Stand taken by British Courts 105(3)

5 Conclusion 108(3)

Chapter 7 Is the Polluter Pays Principle Really Fundamental? An Economic Explanation of the Relative Unimportance of Environmental Liability and Taxes in US Environmental Law 111(10)

Jason Scott Johnston

1 The Polluter Pays Principle and the Paradoxical Insignificance of Environmental Taxes and Liability 111(2)

2 Environmental Taxes and Liability in the United States 113(2)

3 Limits to Implementing the Polluter Pays Principle with Effluent Taxes and Ex Post Liability: Economic Lessons from the American Experience 115(3)

3.1 Environmental Taxes 115(1)

3.2 Ex Post Environmental Liability 116(2)

4 Conclusion 118(3)

References 119(2)

Part II The Bunker Convention 121(38)

Chapter 8 The Era after the Bunker Convention: Is the Gap in China's Regime for Compensating Victims of Vessel-Source Oil Spills Filled? 123(22)

Shan Hongjun

1 Preface 123(1)

2 General Situation of China's Regime before the Bunker Convention 124(10)

2.1 Pollution Damages Governed by CLC 92 126(1)

2.2 Pollution Damages Governed by Domestic Laws 127(4)

2.3 The Gap in the Chinese Regime before the Bunker Convention 131(1)

2.3.1 CLC 92 Oil Pollution Situation 131(1)

2.3.2 Non-CLC 92 Oil Pollution Situation 131(1)

2.3.2.1 No Domestic Compensation Fund 131(1)

2.3.2.2 No Compulsory Insurance Rule 131(1)

2.3.2.3 No Freestanding Liability Limitation Rule 131(1)

2.3.2.4 Unlimited Liability for Oil Pollution Caused by Seagoing Ships of Less Than 20 Tonnes Gross Tonnage 132(2)

2.3.2.5 Unlimited Liability for Oil Pollution Caused by Inland-Water Ships 134(1)

3 The Gaps in the International Regime Filled by Bunker Convention 134(1)

4 Situation of the Chinese Regime after the Bunker Convention 135(5)

4.1 Spills of CLC 92 Oil from CLC 92 Ships 136(1)

4.2 Spills of Bunker Oil from Non-CLC 92 Ships 136(1)

4.3 Spills of Persistent Oil as Cargo from Non-CLC 92 Ships (Coastwise Ships) 136(1)

4.4 Spills of Non-CLC 92 Oil from CLC 92 Ships 137(1)

4.5 Oil Spills from Ships of Less than 20 Tonnes Gross Tonnage 137(1)

4.6 Oil Spills from Inland-Water Ships (Cargo/Bunker) 138(2)

5 The Gap to Be Filled by the Vessel Pollution Prevention Regulations and the China Fund Regulations 140(2)

5.1 Liability Limitation Rule for Non-CLC 92 Pollution Damages and Non-Bunker Pollution Damages Will Be Established 140(1)

5.2 Compulsory Insurance Rule for Non-CLC 92 Vessels Except Those of Less Than 1,000 Tonnes Gross Tonnage and Carrying Non-Oil Cargo Will Be Established 140(2)

5.3 A COPC Fund Will Be Established 142(1)

6 Conclusion 142(3)

Reference 143(2)

Chapter 9 Discussion on Limitation of Liability and Compulsory Insurance of Compensation for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage from Ships in China 145(14)

Han Lixin

Wang Dapeng

1 Introduction 145(2)

2 Shipowners' Limitation of Liability Stated in Domestic Laws 147(6)

2.1 When CLC 1992 Will Apply 147(1)

2.1.1 Ships under the Scope of the Conventions 148(1)

2.1.2 Oil under the Scope of the Conventions 149(1)

2.2 The Application of Domestic Law: CMC and the Provisions Promulgated by Ministry of Transport of the PRC 150(1)

2.3 The Amount of the Limitation of Liability in Domestic Laws 151(1)

2.3.1 Relevant Provisions in Chapter 11 of the CMC 151(1)

2.3.2 The Provisions Promulgated by the Pre-Ministry of Communication 151(2)

3 The Limitation Regulated in the 1976 LLMC and its Protocols 153(2)

3.1 Ships under the Scope of the Convention 153(1)

3.2 The Amount for Limitation of Liability 153(2)

4 The Establishment of a Limitation Fund for Compensation for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage 155(1)

5 Compulsory Insurance or Financial Security 156(2)

5.1 Ships Applied 156(1)

5.2 The Amount of Compulsory Insurance or Financial Security 157(1)

5.3 The Name List of the Insurers 157(1)

6 Conclusion 158(1)

Reference 158(1)

Part III Criminal Law 159(102)

Chapter 10 Criminal Liability for Oil Pollution Damage: An Economic Analysis 161(32)

Michael Faure

1 Introduction 161(2)

2 Why Criminal Law for Oil Pollution Damage? 163(8)

2.1 Arguments in Favour of Public Enforcement 163(1)

2.2 Low Probability of Detection 164(2)

2.3 Administrative or Criminal Law? 166(2)

2.4 Alternatives? 168(1)

2.5 Criminal Law for Marine Pollution? 169(2)

3 Optimal Sanctions for Marine Pollution 171(4)

3.1 Fines or Imprisonment? 171(1)

3.2 Determining the Optimal Sanction 172(1)

3.3 Non-Monetary Sanctions 173(1)

3.3.1 Imprisonment or Restoration? 173(1)

3.3.2 Publicity 174(1)

3.3.3 Forfeiture of Illegal Gains 174(1)

3.3.4 Confiscation 175(1)

4 Corporate Criminal Liability for Oil Pollution? 175(3)

4.1 The Economic Case for Corporate Criminal Liability 175(2)

4.2 ...and on Individuals? 177(1)

4.3 Limits of Corporate Criminal Liability 177(1)

5 Criminal Liability for Oil Pollution Damage: Legal Practice 178(9)

5.1 Insurance of Fines 178(2)

5.2 Ship Source Pollution in the EU 180(3)

5.3 Erika 183(2)

5.4 Empirical Evidence 185(2)

6 Conclusion 187(6)

References 188(5)

Chapter 11 Criminal Liability and Vessel-Source Pollution in the European Union and the United States: Inspiration for the Prevention of Vessel-Source Pollution in China? 193(22)

Liu Nengye

Frank Maes

1 Introduction 193(3)

2 Practice of the European Union 196(8)

2.1 Background 196(2)

2.2 Relevant Cases 198(1)

2.2.1 Operational Discharges 198(1)

2.2.2 Accidental Discharges 199(1)

2.3 The European Court of Justice Case C-308/06 Concerning the Validity of EU Directive 2005/35/EC on Ship Source Pollution 200(3)

2.4 Conclusions 203(1)

3 Practice of the United States 204(4)

3.1 Background 204(1)

3.2 Domestic Legal Regime 204(2)

3.3 Relevant Cases 206(1)

3.3.1 Operational Discharges 206(1)

3.3.2 Accidental Discharges 207(1)

3.4 Conclusions 208(1)

4 What about China? 208(4)

4.1 Background 208(1)

4.2 Domestic Legal Regime 209(2)

4.3 Challenges 211(1)

5 Conclusion 212(3)

References 213(2)

Chapter 12 Criminal Liability of Master and Crew in Oil Pollution Cases: A Possible Conflict between the Law of the Sea Convention (UNCLOS), MARPOL and the European Directive 2005/35/EC 215(16)

Marc A. Huybrechts

1 Introduction 215(1)

2 General Features of Civil Liabilty in Oil Pollution Cases 216(2)

3 Some of the Special Features of the MARPOL Treaties 73/78 218(1)

4 Ratifications of MARPOL 73/78 218(1)

5 The Introduction of the EU Dirctive 2005/35 219(1)

6 But Where is the Conflict between UNCLOS/MARPOL and the EU Directive 2005/35? 220(2)

7 Possible Violations with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982 222(1)

8 The Attack on the European Directive 2005 222(1)

9 The Decision of the European Court on the Legality of European Directive 2005/35 - Case C-308/06 - Grand Chamber of 30 June 2009 223(1)

10 How did the Court Come to These Conclusions? 223(1)

11 The Compatibility of the Directive with UNCLOS 1982 224(1)

12 The Requirement of Legal Certainty 225(1)

13 The Consequences of This Decision 226(1)

14 The IMO Guidelines on the Fair Treatment of Seafarers 227(1)

15 The French Erika Decision 227(1)

16 Let us have a Look at the French Criminal Code 228(1)

17 An Actual Assessment with Reference to the Treatment of Seafarers 229(1)

18 Conclusion 229(2)

References 230(1)

Chapter 13 Criminal Liabilities for Ship-Source Pollution Based on the Laws of China 231(16)

Jiang Yuechuan

1 Preface 231(2)

2 What Kind of Ship-Source Pollution Accidents Will Involve Criminal Liabilities under the Present PRC Legislation? 233(7)

2.1 Legal Basis for Investigations into Criminal Liabilities for Ship-Source Pollution Accidents under the Present Laws of the PRC 233(6)

2.2 Conditions for Investigations into Ship-Source Pollution Accidents for Criminal Liabilities 239(1)

2.2.1 The Ship-Source Pollution Accident Causes Serious Consequences of Marine Environmental Pollution 239(1)

2.2.2 The Ship-Source Pollution Accident or the Pollution Consequence is Caused by a Violation of the Law Committed by the Actor 239(1)

2.3 Examples of Ship-Source Pollution Accidents That May Be Investigated for Criminal Liabilities 240(1)

3 What Kind of Person Will Be Investigated for Criminal Liabilities as a Result of Ship-Source Pollution Accidents under the Laws of the PRC? 240(3)

3.1 Masters and Mariners 240(1)

3.2 Shipowners 241(1)

3.3 Ashore Executive Personnel of Shipowners 241(1)

3.4 Functionaries of State Organs Responsible for Environmental Supervision and Control 242(1)

3.5 Inspectors of Classification Society and Other Vessel Inspection Agencies 242(1)

4 Criterion of Liability for Criminal Liabilities in Ship-Source Pollution Accident 243(4)

Reference 246(1)

Chapter 14 Civil and Criminal Liabilities Concerning Marine Pollution in Hong Kong 247(14)

Li Lianjun

Qin Mu

1 Introduction 247(2)

1.1 Ship-Source Marine Pollution 247(2)

1.2 Relevant Legislations in Hong Kong 249(1)

2 Marine Pollution Legislations of Hong Kong 249(6)

2.1 Shipowners' Strict Liability 249(1)

2.1.1 Provisions Regarding Strict Liability under the CLC 1992 250(1)

2.1.2 Hong Kong Legislation 251(1)

2.2 Limitation of Liability and Cover by the IOPC Fund 251(1)

2.2.1 Provisions Regarding Limitation of Liability in the CLC 1992 252(1)

2.2.2 Local Legislation Regarding Limitation of Liability in Hong Kong 253(1)

2.2.3 Limitation Actions in Hong Kong 253(1)

2.2.4 IOPC Fund 1992 Coverage of the Liability of Shipowners 254(1)

2.2.5 Local Legislation Regarding IOPC Fund 1992 in Hong Kong 255(1)

2.3 Summary 255(1)

3 Criminal Liability 255(4)

3.1 The Regime under MARPOL73/78 256(1)

3.2 Local Legislation Regarding Criminal Liability in Hong Kong 257(2)

4 Conclusion 259(2)

References 260(1)

Part IV United States 261(60)

Chapter 15 A Comparison of the Recovery of Compensation for Injury to Natural Resources under the 92 CLC and Fund Conventions with the US Oil Pollution Act of 1990 263(22)

Robert Force

1 Introduction 263(1)

2 Overview of Major Differences Relating to Compensation 264(3)

3 The Approach under the Conventions 267(5)

4 The Approach in the United States 272(2)

5 The Statutes: OPA 90 274(2)

6 Regulations and Judicial Decisions 276(2)

7 Loss of Services Pending Restoration and the Concept of `Compensatory Restoration' 278(3)

7.1 Loss of use 278(1)

7.2 Compensatory Restoration 278(3)

8 The Future 281(1)

9 Conclusion 282(3)

References 283(2)

Chapter 16 National Interests Influence in Compensation for Damages Resulting from Oil Pollution: The Experience of the United States and its Reference to China 285(14)

Li Tiansheng

Han Lixin

1 Introduction 285(1)

2 The US Development of Compensation for Pure Economic Loss Resulting from Oil Pollution and its Reference to China 286(6)

2.1 The US Development of Compensation for Pure Economic Loss Resulting from Oil Pollution 286(2)

2.2 Lessons from the US Development Concerning the Compensation for Pure Economic Loss Resulting from Oil Pollution for China 288(4)

3 The US Practice in Compulsory Insurance and Fund for Damage Resulting from Oil Pollution and its Reference to China 292(5)

3.1 The US Practice in Compulsory Insurance and Fund for Damage Resulting from Oil Pollution 292(1)

3.1.1 The US Practice in Compulsory Insurance for Damage Resulting from Oil Pollution 292(2)

3.1.2 The US Practice in Establishing a Fund for Damage Resulting from Oil Pollution 294(1)

3.2 Lessons from the US Practice Concerning Compulsory Insurance and the Fund for Damage Resulting from Oil Pollution for China 295(1)

3.2.1 The Regime of Compulsory Insurance in China and Ways to Improve it 295(1)

3.2.2 Establishing a Fund for Oil Pollution in China 296(1)

4 Conclusion 297(2)

References 297(2)

Chapter 17 Study on Ocean Pollution Damage Legislation between the United States and China: A Comparative Perspective 299(22)

Guo Ping

1 Introduction 299(1)

2 The Legislation of the United States on Marine Pollution Damage 300(3)

3 The Main Provisions of American Legislation on Liability for Marine Pollution 303(6)

3.1 Scope of Application 303(1)

3.1.1 Section 1321(b)(3) of the CWA 303(1)

3.1.2 Section 2702 of OPA 1990 304(1)

3.1.3 Section 9601(8) of CERCLA 304(1)

3.2 Scope of Claims for Marine Pollution Damages 304(1)

3.3 Persons Liable for Marine Pollution Damage 305(1)

3.4 Defences for Marine Pollution Liability 306(1)

3.5 Limitation of Liability for Marine Pollution 307(2)

4 The Legislation of China on Marine Pollution and Damage 309(2)

5 The Main Provisions of Chinese Legislation on Liability for Marine Pollution 311(6)

5.1 China Maritime Code 311(1)

5.2 MEPL 311(1)

5.3 Vessel Pollution Prevention Regulation 312(2)

5.4 Ship-Breaking Pollution Prevention Regulation 314(1)

5.5 Offshore Oil Exploration and Exploitation Regulation 314(1)

5.6 Dumping Regulation 315(1)

5.7 Land-Based Pollution Regulation 316(1)

5.8 Coastal Construction Pollution Regulation and Ocean Construction Pollution Regulation 316(1)

6 Comments on the Characteristics of American Laws and Chinese Laws 317(2)

6.1 Characteristics of US Law 317(1)

6.2 Characteristics of Chinese Laws, Regulations and Rules 318(1)

7 Conclusion 319(2)

References 320(1)

Part V China 321(76)

Chapter 18 China and International Protection of Marine Environment 323(24)

Song Ying

1 Introduction 323(1)

2 Overview of the International Law for the Protection of the Marine Environment 324(5)

2.1 Historical Evolution 324(1)

2.2 Treaty Regime 325(1)

2.2.1 Ocean Dumping 326(1)

2.2.2 Vessel-Based Pollution 326(1)

2.2.3 Land-Based Pollution 327(1)

2.2.4 Intervention in Accidents or Emergency of Oil Pollution 327(1)

2.2.5 Liability and Compensation for Pollution Damages 327(1)

2.2.6 Conservation of Marine Living Resources 328(1)

2.3 Competent Institutions 328(1)

3 China: Challenges and Legal Responses 329(11)

3.1 Challenges of the Costal and Marine Environment 329(1)

3.1.1 Polluted Marine Areas 329(1)

3.1.2 Eutrophication 330(1)

3.1.3 Oil Spills 330(1)

3.1.4 Habitats Destruction 331(1)

3.1.5 Overfishing 331(1)

3.2 Legal Responses: External 331(2)

3.3 Legal Responses: Internal 333(1)

3.4 Select Issues in the Legal Responses 334(1)

3.4.1 Land-Based Sources of Pollution 334(1)

3.4.1.1 Environmental Impact Assessment 334(1)

3.4.1.2 Land-use Planning 335(1)

3.4.2 Water Resources and Water Pollution 336(1)

3.4.2.1 Other Sources of Pollution 337(1)

3.4.3 Vessel-Based Pollution 337(1)

3.4.3.1 Regulatory Authority 337(1)

3.4.3.2 Implementation of MARPOL 73/78 337(1)

3.4.4 Dumping of Waste and Other Matters 338(1)

3.4.5 Exploitation of Marine Resources 338(1)

3.4.5.1 Living Resources 338(1)

3.4.5.2 Non-Living Resources at the Sea-Bed 338(1)

3.4.6 Protection of Critical Areas 339(1)

3.4.7 National Marine Environmental Policies and Strategies 339(1)

3.4.7.1 General Economic, Social and Environmental Policies 339(1)

3.4.7.2 Policies and Strategies for Marine Environment and Coastal Development and Management 339(1)

4 Conclusion 340(7)

Annex 342(2)

References 344(3)

Chapter 19 On the Application of CLC 92 in China 347(12)

Chen Qi

1 Introduction 347(3)

2 Reasons to Apply CLC to Chinese Purely Domestic Oil Pollution Cases 350(5)

2.1 The View That `International Conventions Only Regulate Legal Relationships with Foreign-Related Factors' is Inaccurate 350(2)

2.2 The So-Called `Principle of Inside-Outside Distinction' Should not Be the Basic Principle for Applying International Conventions in China 352(1)

2.3 Applying CLC to Purely Domestic Cases Could Accelerate the Development of Chinese Shipping Industry 353(1)

2.4 Applying CLC to Purely Domestic Oil Pollution Cases Could Resolve Some Practical Issues in Chinese Judicial Practice 354(1)

3 Conclusion 355(4)

References 357(2)

Chapter 20 Compensation for the Domestic Oil Pollution in China's Coast: Which Law Shall Apply? 359(12)

Zhang Liying

1 Introduction 359(1)

2 The Application of CLC in the Domestic Oil Spills 360(3)

3 The Reasons for the Application of the Domestic Law 363(1)

4 The Rationale for the Application of Domestic Law 364(4)

4.1 The Limitations of the Marine Environment Protection Law 364(1)

4.2 The Strict Liability and Compensatory Damage in the General Principles of the Civil Law is not Applicable to Domestic Oil Spill Disputes 365(1)

4.3 The Application of the Maritime Code in the Coastal Oil Spills Compensation 366(2)

5 The Solution: The Establishment of a Lex Specialis and a Compensation Fund 368(1)

6 Conclusion 368(3)

References 369(2)

Chapter 21 Compulsory Liability Insurance on Carriage of Liquid and Dangerous Cargo by Coastal and Inland Waters in China 371(14)

Chu Beiping

Zhang Jinlei

1 Introduction 371(1)

2 The Functions of the Compulsory Liability Insurance 372(2)

2.1 The Function of Strong Social Administration 372(1)

2.2 The Function of Extensive Economical Indemnification 373(1)

3 Necessity of Compulsory Liability Insurance on Carriage of Liquid and Dangerous Cargo Transporation 374(1)

4 Glance on the Current Laws on the Prevention of Pollution to the Ocean 375(4)

4.1 International Conventions 375(1)

4.1.1 MARPOL73/78 375(1)

4.1.2 CLC 1992 376(1)

4.1.3 HNS Convention 1996 376(1)

4.1.4 The Bunker Convention 2001 377(1)

4.2 Domestic Laws 377(2)

5 Obstacles 379(3)

5.1 The Scope of Liquid and Dangerous Cargo is Difficult to Define 379(1)

5.2 Companies' Lack of Strong Sense of Responsibility for Obtaining Public Liability Insurance 380(1)

5.3 Disadvantages of Compulsory Liability Insurance 380(1)

5.4 Limitation of Insurance Product 381(1)

5.5 Obstacles in Law 381(1)

6 Prospect 382(1)

6.1 The Joint Effort of the China Insurance Regulatory Commission and the Ministry of Transport of China 382(1)

6.2 Experiment on Selected Industries 382(1)

6.3 Development of Insurance Product 383(1)

7 Conclusion 383(2)

References 384(1)

Chapter 22 The Factors Affecting Judicial Authentication on Maritime Oil Pollution and Relevant Solving Measures 385(12)

Sun Guang

1 Introduction 385(1)

2 Basic Legal Provisions of Judicial Authentication 386(2)

3 Factors Affecting Impartiality of Judicial Authentication 388(1)

4 Controversy on the Scope of Maritime Oil Pollution Authentication 389(3)

5 Difficulties of Determining Authentication Reports and Relevant Solving Measures 392(5)

References 395(2)

Part VI Case Studies 397(46)

Chapter 23 Legal Issues from the Hebei Spirit Oil Spill Incident 399(14)

Hu James Zhengliang

1 Introduction 399(1)

2 The Incident 400(2)

3 Investigation into the Incident and Litigations 402(5)

3.1 Investigation into the Incident 402(1)

3.1.1 Investigation Conducted by KMST 402(1)

3.1.2 Investigation Conducted by MARDEP 403(1)

3.2 Criminal Litigations in Korea 404(1)

3.2.1 The First Trial 404(1)

3.2.2 The Second Trial 404(1)

3.2.3 The Third Trial 404(1)

3.2.4 Strong Reactions from the International Community 405(1)

3.3 Civil Litigations in Korea 406(1)

3.3.1 Claims for Pollution Damages against SHI Etc. and SHI's Application for Limitation 406(1)

3.3.2 Owners' Application for Limitation of Liability 406(1)

3.4 Recourse Litigations in China 407(1)

4 Assessment and Settlements of Oil Pollution Claims 407(1)

5 Measures Taken by Korean Government 408(1)

5.1 Special Law for the Support of the Victims of the Hebei Spirit Oil Pollution Incident 408(1)

5.2 Korean Government's Decision to `Stand Last in the Queue' 408(1)

5.3 Hardship Payments Made by the Korean Government 408(1)

6 What May Be Learnt in Legal Perspectives by China? 409(3)

6.1 Oil Water-Borne? Transport and Legislations in China 409(1)

6.2 The Necessity of Setting up a Domestic Oil Pollution Compensation Fund 410(1)

6.3 Improvement of Statutory Provisions Regarding Compensation for Oil Pollution Damages from Ships 411(1)

6.4 Improvement of Law Regarding Criminal Liability of Offending Seafarers 411(1)

6.5 Improvement of Emergency Response System 411(1)

7 Conclusion 412(1)

Chapter 24 A Review and Critical Analysis on the MSC Ilona Oil Spill Incident at Pearl River Estuary 413(10)

Li Zhonghua

Zhou Zhujun

1 Incident Review 413(1)

2 Critical Analysis to the Incident Emergency Treatment 414(3)

2.1 Potential Efficiency of Regional Emergency Resources has not Been Fully Deployed 414(2)

2.2 Establishing a Collaboration System of Oil Spill Emergency Treatment at the Pearl River Estuary Could Greatly Enhance the Oil Spill Emergency Treatment Efficiency 416(1)

3 Lodging of Claims Exposes the Distempereness of Compensation Laws and Systems 417(2)

3.1 The Process of Claim Lodging 417(1)

3.2 Divergence on How Entity Responsible for Incident Should Assume Liability is the Main Barrier to Compensation Negotiations 417(1)

3.3 Analysis on How to Assume Liability 418(1)

3.4 Divergence on Whether Cleanup Cost has the Priority of Gaining Compensation Leads to Dispute on the Distribution of Compensation 419(1)

4 Countermeasures and Suggestions 419(4)

4.1 To Accelerate the Completeness of Relevant Legislations Such as `CMC' in Order to Effectively Protect the Benefit of Aggrieved Party of Pollution and Participants of Cleanup Operations 420(1)

4.2 To Implement Measures as Establishing Exclusive Funds for Oil Spill Damage to Increase the Emergency Power to Deal with Oil Spills 421(1)

4.3 To Enhance Efficiency of Emergency Treatment by Rationalizing the Managing System and Completing Emergency Evaluation System 421(1)

References 421(2)

Chapter 25 A Case Study of Compensation for Marine Oil Pollution Damage: Centring in the Compensation Claim of the Amorgos Oil Pollution Accident 423(20)

Wang Yuh-Ling

1 MV Amorgos Claims Process 423(13)

1.1 Background 423(2)

1.2 Disputes 425(1)

1.2.1 An International or Domestic Case 425(1)

1.2.2 Time-Consuming Nature of International Maritime Claims 426(1)

1.2.3 The High Cost of International Maritime Claims 426(1)

1.2.4 The Amount Claimed for Damages 426(1)

1.2.5 Regulations Limiting the Liability of the Country in Which the Shipowner and the Ship Operator are Registered 427(1)

1.2.6 Wreckage Removal 428(1)

1.3 Relevant International Regimes 429(1)

1.3.1 Scope of Application 429(1)

1.3.1.1 Ship 429(1)

1.3.1.2 Bunker Oil 429(1)

1.3.1.3 Geographical Coverage 429(1)

1.3.2 Party or Parties Liable for Compensation 429(1)

1.3.3 Basis of Liability and Criteria of Exclusions 430(1)

1.3.4 Scope of Compensation 430(1)

1.3.5 Limitation of Liability 431(1)

1.3.6 Compulsory Insurance or Financial Security 432(1)

1.3.7 Direct Litigation Regime 432(1)

1.3.8 Time Limits for Claiming Compensation 433(1)

1.3.9 Jurisdiction 433(1)

1.4 Analysis and Assessment of the Case 433(1)

1.4.1 Applicable Laws and Court with Jurisdiction 433(1)

1.4.2 Who Should Be the Claimant 433(1)

1.4.3 Claim for Compensation and Scope of Liability 434(1)

1.4.4 Party or Parties against Which Pollution Damage is Claimed 435(1)

1.4.5 Appropriateness to Restrict the Crew from Leaving Taiwan 435(1)

2 Discussion on Applicable Taiwan Legal Regimes of Compensation for Marine Oil Pollution 436(5)

2.1 Liability to Damage Compensation for Tort in the Civil Law of Taiwan 436(1)

2.2 Application of International Conventions on the Oil Pollution Cases in Taiwan 437(1)

2.2.1 Restricted Affirmation 437(1)

2.2.2 Affirmation 437(1)

2.2.3 Negation 437(2)

2.3 Discussion and Review of Taiwan's Legislation on Marine Oil Pollution 439(2)

3 Conclusion 441(2)

Part VII Comparative Conclusions 443

Chapter 26 Comparative Conclusions 445

Michael Faure

Han Lixin

Shan Hongjun

1 Introduction 445(1)

2 Prevention 446(1)

3 Compensation Issues 447(2)

4 The Bunker Convention 449(1)

5 Criminal Law 450(1)

6 The United States as Example? 451(2)

7 Damage Assessment, Claims Handling and Insurance in China 453(1)

8 Case Studies 454(1)

9 The Way Forward 454