Maritime Law Evolving: Thirty Years at Southampton

• Author: Dr. Damien J Cremean
• Position: Adjunct Professor, University of Queensland; Barrister-at-Law
• Pages: 83-84

(2015) 29 ANZ Mar LJ

83

BOOK REVIEW

Malcolm Clark (ed). Maritime Law Evolving: Thirty Years at

Southampton. Hart Publishing, Oxford, 2013. 338 pp.

ISBN: 9781849463997

Dr Damien Cremean

*

For anyone wanting to see maritime law in a broad er way – from a broader perspective – as an evolving

phenomenon, then Maritime Law Evolving by Malcolm Clark (ed) is a very good read.

The sub-title to the book is Thirty Years at Southampton. The book consists of a collec tion of peer-reviewed

papers written by present and past members of the Institute of Maritime Law at the Southampton Law School on

the occasion of the thirtieth anniversary of the Institute. Each paper in the collection, which forms a chapter in

the book, has a dual J anus-like purpose: to look back to the development of the law in the area during the la st

three decades and to look forward to the direction whic h that development may take in the future.

The contributors to the work include some very well known writers, teachers and authorities in the area: Prof

Yvonne Baatz, Prof Malcolm Forster and Prof Nick Gaskell (now of the TC Beirne School of Law, University

of Queensland) among them.

Part 1 of the book deals with ‘Developments in the Management of the Oceans’. I found the paper by Prof

Forster – ‘Somali Piracy – An Affront to International Law?’ (Chapter 1) – quite fascinating reading. One

conclusion he reaches (at p 21) is that ‘the solution to piracy off the Somali coast lies in the resolutions of the

problems within Somalia itself’ but that ‘[sadly], despite the obvious international goodwill towards that end,

the melancholy truth is that [that] seems as remote as ever’. Another paper in Part 1 is ‘Changing Perspectives

on the High Seas Freedom of Navigation?’ (Chapter 2) by Dr Andrew Serdy. As the title suggests, this paper

looks at the notion of the freedom of the seas particularly in light of the New Zealand decision in Sellers v

Maritime Safety Inspector1 and the subsequent case in the International Tribunal of the Sea (ITLOS) of M/V

Louisa (Saint Vincent and the Grenadines v Kingdom of Spain ).2 Another paper in Part 1 is by Richard Shaw

and is titled: ‘Pollution of the Sea by Hazardous and Noxious Substances – Is a Workable International

Convention on Competition an Impossible Dream?’ (Chapter 3). Marine pollution is a serious international issue

and this paper focuses on 1996 amendm ents3 made to the 1976 International Convention on Limitation of

Liability for Maritime Claims (‘LLMC’)4 following an HNS Conference of that year (1996).5 It then goes on to

examine yet further changes adopted by Protocol at the Diplomatic Conference of 2010.6

The paper by Prof Gaskell is titled ‘Compensation for Offshore Pollution: Ships and Platforms’ (Chapter 4). In

this paper he looks at developments in the law and practice r elating to marine pollution liabilities particularly

over the last 30 years. He points out (p 65) that since 1967 ‘the international comm unity has had to grapple with

a series of legal and practical problems in providing compensation to victims of oil pollution at sea’. That year

(1967) was of c ourse the year of the Torrey Canyon disaster. Subsequent disasters (including the Deepwater

Horizon blow out in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010), Prof Gaskell points out (ibid), have focused attention away

from oil spills from ships and in the direction of offshore platforms and structures and in doing so have raised

‘questions about the traditional boundaries of maritime law, eg. how far it can or should apply to activities at sea

not directly involving ships’. Maritime law – certainly of old – will not supply answers to these sorts of

questions (except analogously perhaps) because they are beyond its traditional understanding.

The final paper in Part 1 is titled ‘Shipping and the Marine Environment in the 21st Century’ and is by Prof

Mikis Tsimplis (Chapter 5). In this paper Prof Tsimplis concludes (at p 126) that ‘the shipping of the future

must (a) be part of a path for the sustainable development of each state; and (b) consider the (unknown) limits of

* Adjunct Professor, University of Queensland;

Barrister-at-Law. .

1 [1999] 2 NZLR 44.

2 ITLOS Reports 2008-2010, 58.

3 [2004] ATS 16.

4 1050 UNTS 16.

5 International Convention on Liability and Compensation for Damage in Connection with the Carriage of Hazardous and Noxious

Substances by Sea, 1996, 35 ILM 1415.

6 [2010] ATNIF 55.