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

INTERNATIONAL Old regime: 1969 Civil Liability Convention/1971 Fund Convention 1971 Fund New regime: 1992 Civil Liability Convention/1992 Fund Convention 1992 Fund 2003 Supplementary Fund Protocol Supplementary Fund COMPENSATION REGIMES

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

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

1992 CONVENTIONS APPLY TO:  Spills of persistent oil from tankers  Pollution damage  Preventive measures and clean-up

MAIN FEATURES  Strict liability of registered owner  Limitation of liability  Compulsory insurance and direct action  Jurisdiction and enforcement of judgements

FUND CONVENTION APPLIES  Shipowner exempt  Shipowner financially incapable of meeting obligations  Damage exceeds the shipowner’s liability

MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF COMPENSATION  1992 CLC/Fund Conventions –203 million SDR (US$ 305 million)  2003 Supplementary Fund –750 million SDR (US$ million)

LIMITS LAID DOWN IN THE CONVENTIONS

WHO CONTRIBUTES TO THE FUND  Person receiving > 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

The Haven incident, Italy, 1991

SOME MAJOR SPILLS INVOLVING THE FUNDS Antonio Gramsci (Sweden)1979US$18 M Tanio (France)1980US$36 M Haven (Italy)1991US$58 M Aegean Sea (Spain)1992US$65 M Braer (United Kingdom)1993US$87 M Keumdong N o 5 (Republic of Korea)1993US$21 M Sea Prince (Republic of Korea)1995US$40M Yuil N o 1 (Republic of Korea)1995US$30 M Sea Empress (United Kingdom)1996US$60 M Nakhodka (Japan)1997US$212 M Nissos Amorgos (Venezuela)1997US$21 M Osung N o 3 (Republic of Korea)1997US$16 M Erika (France) (so far)1999US$169 M Prestige (Spain, France and Portugal) (so far)2002US$156 M

CLAIMS HANDLING  Co-operation with insurer  Local Claims Offices  Use of experts  Court actions

The Erika incident, France, 1999

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

UNIFORM APPLICATION OF THE CONVENTIONS  Essential for the functioning of the regime  Equal treatment of claimants

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

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