1、OFFICIAL RECORDS of the INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON LIABILITY AND COMPENSATION FOR DAMAGE IN CONNEXION WITH THE CARRIAGE OF CERTAIN SUBSTANCES BY SEA, 1984 and the INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON THE REVISION OF THE 1969 CIVIL LIABILITY CONVENTION AND THE 1971 FUND CONVENTION, 1992 INTERNATIONAL MARITIM
2、E ORGANIZATION OFFICIAL RECORDS of the INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON LIABILITY AND COMPENSATION FOR DAMAGE IN CONNEXION WITH THE CARRIAGE OF CERTAIN SUBSTANCES BY SEA, 1984 AND THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON THE REVISION OF THE 1969 CIVIL LIABILITY CONVENTION AND THE 1971 FUND CONVENTION, 1992 IMO Lo
3、ndon, 1993 Theprnting of this publkaiwn has been financed by lhe Xnternatwnal Oil Pollution Compensation Fund Published by the iNTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION 4 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7SR First edition 1993 Printed in the United Kingdom by Ashford Press, Southampton 46810975 ISBN 92-801-1
4、304-6 I IMO PUBLICATION I c I Sales Number: IMO 471E Copyright O IMO 1993 All rights reserved No part of this publication may, for sales purposes, be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, mechanical, photocopyin
5、g or otherwise, without prior permission in writing from the International Maritime Organization. CONTENTS INTRODUCTION See Volume 1 Part I INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON LIABILITY AND COMPENSATION FOR DAMAGE IN CONNEXION WITH THE CARRIAGE OF CERTAIN SUBSTANCES BY SEA, 1984 CHAPTER I - BASIC CONFERENCE
6、 DOCUMENTS See Volume I CHAPTER II - COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE II (beginning) (established to consider draft Protocols to 1969 CLC and 1971 Fund Convention) See Volume I CHAPTER II - COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE II (conclusion) (established to consider draft Protocols to 1969 CLC and 1971 Fund Convention) Do
7、cument LEG/CONF.6/ International Organizations: INSA (1969 CLC and 197 1 Fund) ICs (1969 CLC) ICs (1 97 1 Fund) P and I Associations (1969 CLC and 197 1 Fund) IOPC Fund Director (1969 CLC and 197 1 Fund) IALA (1969 CLC) IAPH (1969 CLC and 1971 Fund) ISU (1 969 CLC) IUCN (1969 CLC) CMI (1969 CLC) P a
8、nd I Associations (1969 CLC) P and I Associations (1969 CLC) UNCITRAL (1969 CLC and 197 1 Fund) ACOPS (1969 CLC and 1971 Fund) ACOPS (1969 CLC and 1971 Fund) INTERTANKO (1 969 CLC and 197 1 Fund) OCIMF (I 969 CLC and 197 1 Fund) 10 12 13 14 21 29 34 35 38 39 47 48 52 58 59 INF.URev.1 INF.3 Page 3 4
9、12 15 33 39 40 41 43 46 51 57 64 67 73 77 98 Volume 2 - Contents Document Page LEG/CONF.6/ FOE1 (1969 CLC and 1971 Fund ICs (1969 CLC and 197 1 Fund) IOPC Fund Director Provisional agenda Draft text of Protocol of 1984 to amend the 1969 CLC approved by Committee of the Whole II Article 3 Article 6 D
10、raft text of Protocol of 1984 to amend the 1971 Fund Convention, approved by the Committee of the Whole II Article 6 Text of resolution on the preparation of authentic texts, approved by the Committee of the Whole II Reports to the Committee: Reports of the Working Group on the definition of polluti
11、on damage Report of the Working Group on the simplified amendment procedure INF.4 113 INF.5 137 C.UINF.4 145 c.u1 150 c.u4 150 C.U4lAdd. 1 165 C.U4/Add.2 165 c.z5 166 C.USIAdd. 1 184 C.2/7 185 c.z2 187 c.u3 188 Working papers submitted by: Secretariat compilation of observations, comments and propos
12、als on draft Protocol to revise the 1969 CE received from Governments and international organizations C.2IWP. 1 191 Secretariat compilation of observations, comments and proposals on draft Protocol to review the 1971 Fund Convention received from Governments and international organizations c.m.2 212
13、 (ii) Volume 2 - Gntents Document Page LEG/CONF.6/ Secretariat compilation of observations, comments and proposals on treaty-law questions received from Governments and international organizations France Greece and Federal Republic of Germany Federal Republic of Germany USSR Cuba Cyprus, Greece, Ind
14、ia, Italy, Japan, Poland China and Cuba IOPC Fund Director United States United States United States United States United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom New Zealand Bahamas Turkey Poland Poland China, Cypms, Greece, India, Italy and Japan, Republic of Korea and Singapore OCIMF United States F
15、eeral Republic of Germany Informal Working Group on Geographical Scope of Application Indonesia Bahamas, Italy, United Kingdom and United States IOPC Fund Director Japan, Norway and United Kingdom Ireland, Poland, ACOPS and IUCN and Republic of Korea Poland C.uwP.3 C.uwP.4 C.uWP.5 C.uWP.6 C.uwP.7 C.
16、2iWP.8 and C.uWP.8 Corr.1 C.2mP.9 C.uWP.9IAdd. 1 C.uWPI10 C.uWP.11 C.2mP. I2 C.2mP. 13 C.2/WP. 14 C.UwP. 15 C.2NP. i 6 C.2mP. 17 C.W. i 8 C.uwP. 19 C.2mP.20 C.uwP.21 c. uwP. 22 C.WP.23 C.UWP.23IAdd.l C.uWP.24 C.uWP.25 C.2lWP.26 C.uWP.27 C.uWP.28 C.uWP.29 C.uWP.30 C.uWP.31 C.uWP.32 227 245 259 260 26
17、0 261 262 264 264 265 266 267 272 274 274 275 278 279 279 281 28 1 282 282 283 284 288 288 289 290 290 293 294 France, Federal Republic of Germany, Greece, Netherlands, United States, USSR and P and I Associations C.uwP.33 294 (iii) Document Page LEG/CONF.6/ P and I Associations C.2NP.34 Argentina C
18、.uWP.35Iev. 1 Canada, Federal Republic of Germany, France, Gabon, Ireland, Malaysia, Netherlands, United States and Zaire C.uWP.36 Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Cuba, Ecuador, Mexico, Nicaragua, Peru, Spain and Venezuela C.uWP.37 Panama C.uWP.37IAdd. 1 CMI C.uWP.38 Informal Group C.2NP.39 France, Neth
19、erlands, Norway and United Kingdom C.2NP.40 Australia and Argentina C.2NP.41 Draft resolution on preparation of authentic texts C.WP.43 Proposal by Chairman of the Committee of the Whole II C.uwP.44 Draft report to plenary C.uWP.42 Summary records C.VSR.1-30 Index of primary discussions of articles
20、of draft protocols to revise the 1969 CLC and the 197 1 Fund Convention 296 298 298 304 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 310 311 629 CHAPTER III - DRAFTING COMMITTEE See Volume 3 CHAPTER IV - COMMITTEE ON FINAL CLAUSES See Volume 3 CHAPTER V - PLENARY See Volume 3 CHAPTER VI - INSTRUMENTS ADOPTED BY THE
21、CONFERENCE See Volume 3 CHAPTER VI1 - DOCUMENTS ISSUED IN CONNEXION WITH THE CONFERENCE See Volume 3 CHAPTER VI11 - CONCORDANCE OF ARTICLES See Volume 3 Volume 2 - amtents PART II INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON THE REVISION OF THE 1969 CML LIABILITY CONVENTION AND THE 1971 FUND CONVENTION CHAPTER I - B
22、ASIC CONFERENCE DOCUMENTS See Volume 4 CHAPTER II - RECORDS OF DECISIONS See Volume 4 CHAPTER III - INFORMATION PAPERS See Volume 4 CHAPTER IV - DRAFTING COMMITTEE See Volume 4 CHAPTER V - COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE See Volume 4 Vum 2 - Cantents CHAPTER II COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE II (CONCLUSION) Observat
23、ions and proposals on the draft Protocols to revise the 1969 CLC and the 1971 Fund Conventions by international Organizations 3 Draft text of Protocol of 1984 to amend the 1969 CLC approved by the Committee of the Whole II . 150 Draft text of Protocol of 1984 to amend the 1971 Fund Conventions, appr
24、oved by the Committee of the Whole II . 166 Text of resolution on the preparation of authentic texts, approved by the Committee of the Whole II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185 Report of the Working Group on the definition of pollution damage . 187 Report of the Working Group on the simplif
25、ied amendment procedure . 188 Working papers . 191 Summary records . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 1 1 index of primary discussions of articles of draft Protocols to revise 1969 CLC and the 1971 Fund Convention 629 1 LEG/CONF.6/1 O 28 February 1984 CONSIDERATION OF DRAF PROTOC
26、OLS TO REVISE THE 1969 CLC AND THE 1971 FUND CONVENTIONS Submission by the International Shipowners Association (INSA) 1. imply the extension of application of CLC 1969 (Article II) on the ecological sphere, since such damage cannot be, for the time being, precisely defined. 2. CLC 1969 should apply
27、 to tankers and OB0 ships carrying oil cargoes, unladen tankers with oil-cargo residues on board, OB0 ships in voyages next after oil carriage, provided oil-cargo residues from preceding voyage were left on board. The Convention should not apply however to the pollution by oil-bunkers from dry-cargo
28、 ships, or tankers, or OB0 ships, when oil-cargo residues were not on board the two latter types of vessels. The definition of oil pollution damage (CLC 1969, Article 1.6) should not 3. Much less significant damages by non-persistent oils do not exceed, as a rule, the established limits of shipowner
29、s liability. 4. be considered in reasonable limits only, with the aim to eliminate the negative effects of inflation. The existing balance between risks borne by ship and cargo should be preserved. Concrete limits for increased liability of shipowners and of the Fund could be defined based upon reli
30、able data furnished by competent organizations, which might prove to what limits such liability could be increased. 5. Abolishment of principles determining the shipowners liability in accordance with the ships tonnage (CLC 1969, Article V.l), suggested by OCIMF, cannot be accepted. These principles
31、 proved to be correct inasmuch as the extent of pollution is, in most cases, directly connected with ships size and consequently with the quantity of oil-cargo carried on board. 6. of liability for small-size vessels is acceptable. In such a case, only the liability of ships not exceeding a certain
32、tonnage would be not lower than such minimal amount of liability. CLC 1969 (Article 1.5) should apply to damages by persistent oils only. _- - An increase of shipowners liability in CLC 1969 and in FUND 1971 might Notwithstanding paragraph 5 above, establishment of the minimal amount 7. Reasons for
33、exempting the shipowners liability (CLC 1969, Article III.2) should be preserved, but the scope of paragraph (c) thereof should be extended in order to exonerate shipowners from liability in cases when the pollution damage was caused by any negligence or other wrongful act of the Government, or othe
34、r authority, in performance of their duties for securing the safety of navigation. Volume 2 - C?wr /I 3 8. possibility of taking over the part of shipowners liability by the Fund, might be decided only in conjunction with a just increase of shipowners liability limits in CLC 1969. In case of any dra
35、stic increase of these limits, such elimination would affect the balance between the interests of ship and cargo. 9. revision of limits of liability of shipowners and the Fund, seems to be reasonable and necessary. However, the suggested automatic convocation of the conference on revision of limits
36、of liability in certain periods is not acceptable. The idea of convening a revision committee at the request of a certain number of Contracting States seems to be more reasonable. Elimination from FUND 1971 (Article 5) of the provision providing the The inclusion in CLC 1969 of a provision determini
37、ng the procedure of 10. Suggestions to eliminate from FUND 1971 (Article 10) the principle of computing the contributions to the Fund depending on the quantity of received oil, or to supplement this criterion by other ones, should not be accepted because the functioning of the Fund would certainly b
38、e affected, whereas the existing practice proved to be reasonable and just. LEG/CONF.6/12 27 February 1984 CONSIDERATION OF A DRAF PROTOCOL TO REVISE THE 1969 CLC Note by the International Chamber of Shipping (ICs) Note: The comments below are submitted on behalf of the generality of the ICs members
39、hip, reflecting the views of the shipping industry in 32 countries. It must, however, be stated that certain of the views expressed in the paper are not shared by the oil company-owned tanker fleets within the ICs membership. INTRODUCTION Ever since the Torrey Canyon incident in 1967, the Worlds con
40、sciousness of the danger to the environment of oil pollution has been acute. Remedial action has centred on the physical prevention of pollution, and the entry into force of the 1973/78 MARPOL Convention on 2 October 1983 is to be welcomed. Yet improved levels of safety and environmental protection
41、cannot eliminate accidents and the question of compensation for oil pollution damage has likewise attracted much attention. 4 Volume 2 - Chapter /I CONGV12 GENERAL REMARKS In 1960, the Civil Liability Convention (CLC) was introduced, accompanied by a Resolution in the following terms: 1. Victims sho
42、uld be fully and adequately compensated under a system based upon the principle of strict liability. The Fund should in principle relieve the shipowner of the additional financial burden imposed by the present Convention. 2. In 1971, the Fund Convention was adopted. Although it did not fully impleme
43、nt the Resolution, it introduced the principle of a sharing of the cost of pollution compensation between the carrier and the cargo owner. Under the 1957 Limitation Convention (which did not impose liability), the shipowners liability for property damage was 1, gold francs. The 1969 CLC doubled this
44、 amount and imposed strict liability, thus requiring the shipowner to pay for damage caused whether or not he was at fault. Under the 1971 Fund, the shipowners liability was rolled-back to 1,500 gold francs and the difference was borne by the Fund. For the fmt few years of this rgime, the outcome of
45、 the system was that the shipowner bore by far the greatest part of the burden. Then a number of serious incidents in 1978, 1979 and 1980 resulted in some heavy claims being paid by oil interests, although in no case did the cargo owners pay 50% in any one year. This increased participation of cargo
46、 interests in the payment of compensation led to pressure to amend both the Conventions, even though the Fund Convention Assembly had not exercised its power to increase the value of the Fund to the full extent authorized, without actually having to amend the Conven tion. While many States were doub
47、tful of the need to amend the 1969 CLC, there is now general recognition that the figures agreed upon in 1969 and 1971 have declined in value because of inflation and cost increases generally, and that a case can be made for raising the limits. Moreover, a number of States consider that it was a mis
48、take in 1969 not to introduce a minimum level of liability. However. a few also appear to consider that the principle of sharing, on which the existing instruments are based. is inappropriate and that oil interests should only become involved when the potential of the shipowner is totally exhausted.
49、 The ICs view is that the sharing of liability was right in 1969 and remains so today, not only because higher than normal liability and compensation are demanded as a result of the nature of the substance, but also because the existence of liability imposes disciplines on both parts of the industry. Proposals which effectively require the shipowner alone to bear the burdens currently borne by the CLC and Fund collectively are virtually a complete departure from the sharing concept, which the majority of States which have spoken in the Legal Committee h
