ABSTRACT
As the carrying capacity of passenger Ro’ Ro’ ferries has continued to grow, certain established shipping practices and legislation may have been slow to keep up. As a result, it is possible that two particular areas have fallen so far behind that they could actually encourage the operation of substandard ships; classification societies and limitation of liability Conventions. This paper examines the current role and structure of these two important bodies to identify where any shortfalls may be.
The main problem with limitation Conventions is the possibility that levels of limitation are set too low, and that insurers can deviate from the Articles of the Convention as and when it suits them The fact that levels of liability are too low may remove much of the incentive for shipowners to spend extra money on safety. Insurers are also allowed to exercise so much flexibility as to the amount of the compensation offered, that this may further remove the shipowners’ incentive to improve safety. With respect to classification societies, the service that they currently provide to shipping may be marginalised and insufficient to eradicate the operation of poor quality ships. It is also possible that market forces serve to keep this status quo. In addition, classification societies are virtually ‘untouchable’ when it comes to liability for their acts or omissions, and as such this may increase the problems mentioned. To support and illustrate these arguments, developments following the recent Ro’ Ro’ ferry accident ‘Estonia’ are analysed and discussed. The ultimate conclusion is that limitation of liability Conventions, and classification societies are in need of restructuring in particular areas. This should be carried out in conjunction with structural changes to the actual design of Ro’ Ro’ ferries to help increase the levels of safety in shipping, and so that any further loop holes are removed.
