Legal Challenges with Unmanned Shipping

Balex Seminar Calonia, Turku, 10 May 2019

Henrik RingbomProfessor II, Scandinavian Institute of Maritime Law, Oslo, Norway

Professor of Maritime Law, Univeristy of Turku

Adjunct Professor (Docent) in Maritime Law and the Law of the Sea,

Åbo Akademi University, Turku, Finland

Outline

General

1. Many aspects of maritime law

affected

2. Here, mainly international

perspective

3. Terminology/definitions

Different aspects of maritime law

Jurisdictional rules (main target: states)

Technical req. and standards

(main target: flag states)

Private law issues (main target: shipowner and

commercial partners)

Other rules (Criminal, social,

commercial, public law etc.)

Global (UN)

UNCLOS

Global (IMO&ILO)

SOLAS, MARPOL, STCW, COLREGS, MLC

Global (IMO,

UNCITRAL, CMI etc.)

Private law conventions on e.g. liability, limitation, arrest,

carriage of goods, salvage, etc.

European Union

Ship safety directives & regulations

Limitations on exemptions

Product liability rules, insurance requirements

Rules on competent jurisdiction

and applicable law

Several issues covered by EU Treaty & legislation

Nordic states Nordic Maritime Codes, Nordic marine insurance terms

National (Finland)

National implementing legislation, discretion of flag state administration

(Trafi)

Finnish Maritime Code 674/1994, other specified acts

on liability, insurance etc.

The entire legislation applies a priori for ships

flying its flag

Law of the sea

Vessels/ships?

UNCLOS

IMO Conventions

National law

Conclusion

Implications

Article 94 (Duties of the flag State)

3. Every State shall take such measures for ships flying its flag as are necessary to ensure safety at sea with regard, inter alia , to:

b) the manning of ships, labour conditions and the training of crews, taking into account the applicable international Instruments;

4. Such measures shall include those necessary to ensure:…

b) that each ship is in the charge of a master and officers who possess appropriate qualifications, in particular in seamanship, navigation, communications and marine engineering, and that the crew is appropriate in qualification and numbers for the type, size, machinery and equipment of the ship;

5. In taking the measures called for in paragraphs 3 and 4 each State is required to conform to generally accepted international regulations, procedures and practices and to take any steps which may be necessary to secure their observance.

High Seas

Exclusive

Economic

Zone

Territorial

sea

Land

200 NM

12 NM

24 NM

In the beginning…

The unmanned ship level of autonomy

Remotely operated

Traditional operation

Fully autonomous

More recently

Involveslegalchallenges,requiressomedegreeofregulatoryinterven on

Canbeaccommodated

withintheexis nglegalframework

IMO Conventions - General

General on legal challenges in international conventions

• Various studies of the legal

hurdles

• CMI study (MSC 99/INF.8)

• Danish (MSC 99/INF.XX

• IMO Secretariat (MSC 100/

• Main legal challenges

• Surprisingly few outright conflicts (STCW Part VIII)

• A lot of uncertainties (function-driven requirements)

• Affects how you deal with them

Technical rules

• Usually laid down in the form of

functions to be performed

• SOLAS

• Exemptions, equivalences

• V/14 Safe manning

• COLREGs:

• Lookout (Rule 5)

• Decision-making (Rule 2)

• STCW

• Practical issues (documentation,

PSC, salvage, pilotage?)

• International foundation needed

(possibly in a ‘soft law’ format)

Colregs

Look-out (Rule 5)

Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper look-out by sight and hearing as well as by all available means appropriate in the prevailing circumstances and conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the risk of collision.

Responsibility (Rule 2a)

Nothing in these Rules shall exonerate any vessel, or the owner, master or crew thereof, from the consequences of any neglect to comply with these Rules or of the neglect of any precaution which may be required by the ordinary practice of seamen, or by the special circumstances of the case.

What is happening at IMO?

Regulatory Scoping Exercise

Broad discussions at MSC 99 (May

2018) (four degrees of autonomy)

Correspondence group worked on

methodology inter-sessionally over

the summer

LEG 106 in March 2019

Next MSC (101) in May 2019

IMO degrees of autonomy

1) Ship with automated processes and decision support

2) Remotely controlled ship with seafarers on board

3) Remotely controlled ship without seafarers on board

4) Fully autonomous ship

On the nature of the challenge

REMOTE CONTROLLED AUTONOMOUS

UNMANNED

PARTIALLY MANNED 2

3

1

4

Current state of play

Summing up – IMO work on MASS

• Complex regulatory exercise ahead; not going fast.

• Relevance of RSE exercise is uncertain

• Practical concerns (workload), but theory doubts as

well as to the coherence of the approach (too

broadbrushed treatment of gliding scales in

autonomy and manning)

• Level or nature of challenge cannot be established

by looking at existing conventions

• Needed: new instrument, based on goal-based

standards, coupled with guidelines

Summing up

• In general: few direct prohibitions, flag state is key

and has wide discretion if satisfied about safety

• Generally, the key lies in the IMO layer, the other

rules will follow

• Complex regulatory exercise ahead

• Little attention to the need for new rules to date

• Laws can always be changed if there is political

willingness for it, but it takes time

“With the rise of self-

driving vehicles, it's only a matter of time before we get a country song where a guy's truck leaves him too”