ABSTRACT
In 2004 the only alteration to the Rule was the numbering of the paragraphs, a change carried forward to the 2016 Rules. Lowndes and Rudolf state that the terms of Rule C reproduce the English common law as it was then understood. The second paragraph, added in 1994, enshrines the first part of the compromise proposal put forward by the British Maritime Law Association to deal with the vexed question of environmental liabilities and avoidance measures. At one extreme stood the United States' proposal to introduce a second Rule Paramount which would have stated baldly that "in no event shall there be an Allowance in general average for pollution liability or clean-up of pollutants", without indicating how the cost of environmental damage avoidance measures would be treated. At the other end of the spectrum were those who advocated no change, either in Rule C or anywhere else.
