Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and the Council on the civil liability and financial guarantees of shipowners {SEC(2005) 1517}
Date: 2005-11-23
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: civil liability, environmental liability, law of the sea, maritime safety, penalty, polluter pays principle, pollution control measures, pollution from ships

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 23.11.2005 
COM(2005) 593 final 

2005/0242 (COD) 

Proposal for a 

DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL 

on the civil liability and financial guarantees of shipowners 

(presented by the Commission) 

{SEC(2005) 1517} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
 
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 

1)  CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL 

110 

•  Grounds for and objectives of the proposal 

Issues related to the liability of operators in the maritime transport chain are becoming 
a  central  element  of  Community  maritime  transport  policy.  The  following  two 
initiatives illustrate this. 

– 

– 

for 

liability 

criminal 

ship-source 

The  European  Community  has  recently  adopted  a  scheme  for  administrative 
and 
offences 
(Directive 2005/35/EC, OJ L 255, 30.9.2005, p. 11). This system of sanctions, 
which is based on the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, aims 
to  make  all  the  links  in  the  maritime  transport  chain  more  responsible  by 
strengthening  the  legislation  enacted  under  the  International  Maritime 
Organisation  (IMO)  Convention  for  the  Prevention  of  Pollution  from  Ships 
(Marpol Convention). 

pollution 

A proposal for a Regulation on the civil liability of passenger carriers by sea 
has  been  sent  to  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council  as  part  of  this 
package.  The  aim  of  this  proposal  is  to  incorporate  into  Community  law  the 
2002 Protocol to the Athens Convention relating to the Carriage of Passengers 
and their Luggage by Sea which was adopted under the auspices of the IMO. 
At the same time as adopting this proposal, the Community and the Member 
States should be able to accede to this Protocol. 

This proposal for a Directive supplements this legislation. Its purpose is to establish, at 
European Union level, a civil liability scheme for shipowners (a category covering all 
the people responsible for operating a ship) in the event of damage to a third party.  

By presenting this proposal the Commission is responding to concerns expressed both 
by the European Parliament, the European Council and the Council.  

On 21 March 2004 the European Parliament called for “a comprehensive and cohesive 
European  maritime  policy,  which  would  have  as  its  objective  the  creation  of  a 
European  maritime  safety  area  (…)  based  on  (…)  the  introduction  of  a  system  of 
liability covering the entire maritime transport chain (…)”. 

On  21 March  2003  the  European  Council  called  for  “increasing  liability  of  maritime 
transport  operators”  as  part  of  the  work  on  the  possible  revision  of  the  international 
compensation system for oil pollution damage. 

On  20 December 2000  the  Council  of  Transport  Ministers  adopted  conclusions  on 
maritime  safety  asking  the  Member  States  to  “consider  possible  amendments  to  the 
applicable rules in order to render parties other than shipowners liable, as well as the 
introduction  of  unlimited  liability  of  shipowners  in  the  event  of  severe  or  deliberate 
infringement of their safety obligations”. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
120 

•  Background 

A  number  of  international  conventions  on  the  civil  liability  of  shipowners  have  been 
adopted.  

These conventions all have limitations, starting with the fact that most have not entered 
into  force,  and  that  those  which  have  entered  into  force  have  done  so  only  in  some 
countries.  

But  it  is  mainly  in  substance  that  the  rules  established  by  these  conventions  are 
unsatisfactory, because they make no real contribution either to preventing damage or 
to ensuring it is repaired. 

– 

In terms of preventing damage 

International  schemes  only  have  a  very  limited  preventative  and  dissuasive  effect. 
These  conventions  establish  a  traditional  principle  of  maritime  law:  the  almost 
complete limitation of operator liability. 

Under  all  these  conventions  shipowners  are  entitled  to  limit  their  liability.  A  ship 
owner only loses this right if it is proved that the damage “resulted from his personal 
act  or  omission,  committed  with  the  intent  to  cause  such  damage,  or  recklessly  and 
with the knowledge that such damage would probably result”. 

In its ERIKA II communication, the Commission analysed the extent of this “conduct 
barring limitation” and proposed amending this as part of the revision of one of these 
international conventions. 

In  the  Commission’s  view,  “negligence  or  even  gross  negligence  on  behalf  of  the 
owner does not meet these criteria and it is evident that in most circumstances it would 
be  very  difficult  to  breach  this  threshold.  (…)  The  right  of  shipowners  to  limit  their 
liability is [therefore] practically unbreakable. (…) At least proof of gross negligence 
on behalf  of  the  ship owner should  trigger unlimited liability.  Such  a measure  would 
relate the exposure to liability more closely to the conduct of the ship owner and would 
thus produce both preventive and punitive effects”. 

The legitimacy of the principle of limited liability is being increasingly contested. One 
example  outside  the  maritime  transport  sector  is  the  adoption,  in  spring  2004,  of  the 
Directive  on  environmental  liability  which  deals  with  the  principle  of  operators' 
unlimited liability (Directive 2004/35/EC, OJ L 143, 30.4.2004, p. 56). 

– 

In terms of repairing damage 

Faced with all the legislation establishing a liability regime, some shipowners could be 
tempted to arrange their own insolvency. Moreover, there is no obligation for general 
insurance in the maritime area. 

It is therefore particularly important for insurance to be made obligatory, or at least to 
require  owners  to  take  out  a  financial  guarantee  in  order  to  protect  the  interests  of 
victims. Such an obligation would also help enhance the quality of the merchant navy 
(since in principle the insurers themselves would distinguish between sub-standard 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
ships and others), and would re-establish competition between operators (it is estimated 
that 5% of ships have no insurance cover). 

It is these considerations which have led some international conventions applicable to 
certain types of pollution to require shipowners to sign financial guarantees (the 1992 
Convention  on  Civil  Liability  for  Oil  Pollution  Damage,  the  1996  Convention  on 
Liability and Compensation for Damage in connection with the Carriage of Hazardous 
and  Noxious  Substances  by  Sea,  which  has  not  yet  entered  into  force,  and  the  2001 
Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage, which has also not yet 
entered into force). Outside the areas covered by these Conventions there is no binding 
international  legislation  on  the  matter.  However,  it  should  be  noted  that  in  1999  the 
IMO  adopted  guidelines  recommending  that  shipowners  take  out  civil  liability 
insurance. Lastly, it should be stressed that obligatory insurance systems have been set 
up by a number of third countries. 

Financial guarantees are granted up to certain levels, above which the ship owner alone 
must  pay  all  the  compensation  due  to  the  victim.  The  possibility  of  removing  the 
ceilings  on  civil  liability  is  a  real  incentive  to  take  account  of  the  risks  inherent  in 
owning ships and therefore contributes towards making operators act more responsibly. 

Modernising these international Conventions will involve revising them. The revision 
process  is  underway  for  the  1992  Convention  on  Civil  Liability  for  Oil  Pollution 
Damage.  The  Commission  intends  to  work  for  improvements  to  be  made  to  this 
convention, such as removing the ceiling on civil liability. 

The other relevant international conventions will not be updated in the near future. For 
this  reason  the  Commission  is  herewith  proposing  to  follow  a  pragmatic  two  step 
approach.. 

As a first step, it is proposed that all Member States become contracting parties to the 
umbrella international convention on liability for maritime transport which is the 1996 
Convention  on  the  Limitation  of  Liability  for  Maritime  Claims.  The  directive  would 
also  incorporate  this  convention  into  Community  law  in  order  to  ensure  its  full  and 
uniform application all over the EU. With this proposal, the Commission also suggests 
to make use of a possibility offered by this convention which consists in an incentive 
for  third  countries  to  become  party  to  this  convention  alike.  It  is  to  be  noted  that  in 
parallel to this directive, Member States are anyhow preparing for the ratification of the 
abovementioned conventions on hazardous and noxious substance and on bunker oil. 

As a second step, the Commission will seek a mandate for negotiating within the IMO 
the  revision  of  the  abovementioned  1996  Convention,  in  order  to  review  the  level  at 
which  shipowners  lose  their  right  to  limit  their  liability.  This  future  complementary 
Commission  initiative  will  be  based  on  a  consultation  with  the  different  stakeholders 
and an in-depth economic analysis of the issue, and bear in mind developments in the 
international transport sector.  

139 

•  Provisions in force in the area covered by the proposal 

There are no existing provisions in the area covered by the proposal. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
141 

•  Coherence with other Union policies and objectives 

This proposal is one of a series of measures aimed at boosting maritime safety as part 
of the “safety” priority of the Commission’s annual strategy policy. The proposal will 
help protect the environment by making potential polluters act more responsibly. It will 
also improve the living and working conditions of seafarers. 

2)  CONSULTATION OF INTERESTED PARTIES AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

•  Consultation of interested parties 

211 

Consultation methods, main sectors targeted and general profile of respondents 

When preparing this new legislative package the Commission held a double round of 
consultative  meetings  in  May 2004  and  February 2005  with  representatives  of  the 
Member States and the different sectors of the maritime industry, including seafarers, 
on  the  basis  of  staff  working  papers  containing  a  detailed  list  of  questions  on  the 
planned initiatives. The Commission has also collected detailed written comments on 
these issues.  

212 

Summary of responses received and how they have been taken into account 

In terms of removing the ceiling on civil liability, industry representatives asserted that 
the focus should be on the discussions currently being held at international level in line 
with the possible revision of the 1992 Conventions on Civil Liability and compensation 
for Oil Pollution Damage. 

industry  representatives  were  divided  about  obligatory 

The 
insurance.  The 
representatives of shipowners were sceptical towards the Commission’s initiative. The 
representatives  of 
the  benefit  of  such  a  measure.  The 
representatives  of  seafarers  warmly  welcomed  the  obligation  to  take  out  insurance 
against  damage  to  third  parties  and  for  the  repatriation  of  seafarers  in  the  event  of 
abandonment. 

insurers  emphasised 

229 

230 

•  Obtaining and using expertise 

No external experts were needed. 

•  Impact analysis 

The two options are: 

– 

to  promote  the  implementation  of  international  conventions.  The  relatively 
slow pace of national ratification processes makes the date of entry into force 
and  the  geographical  scope  of  these  conventions  uncertain.  This  directive 
would be the most proper binding instrument under which these conventions 
can be swiftly and uniformly applied at EU level. In addition, this directive 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
– 

– 

would permit a medium-term possibility of modernising civil liability law in 
the maritime sector, 

to set up an adapted Community regime aimed partly at removing ceilings on 
civil  liability,  but  also  at  obliging  shipowners  to  take  out  insurance.  The 
impact of this second option can be described as follows. 

In  terms  of  removing  ceilings,  only  shipowners  guilty  of  gross  negligence  will  be 
affected, for the greater benefit of those owners mindful of security standards who will 
continue  to  enjoy  the  protection  of  limited  liability.  It  should  also  be  noted  that 
establishing an obligatory insurance system will help tackle the problem of substandard 
ships,  in  the  same  way  as  applying  the  other  measures  contained  in  this  legislative 
package. Accordingly, it is expected that the risk to insurers will not increase. 

In  addition,  it  should  be  noted  that  this  approach  would  presuppose  that  the  Member 
States which are contracting parties to the 1996 Convention denounce it in good time 
and at the latest by the end of the transposition period for this Directive.  

As regards obligatory insurance, the vast majority of owners who already have a civil 
liability insurance policy for damage to third parties caused by their ships will benefit 
from  this  new  regime  in  that  the  market  will  not  be  distorted  by  the  actions  of  some 
unscrupulous operators with no insurance.  

In practical terms, shipowners should follow the procedures to obtain certificates and 
then notify their on-board presence.  

The crew will also benefit from the protection afforded by the financial guarantee for 
the repatriation of seafarers. 

The situation of persons who have suffered damage caused by a ship and who demand 
that this be made good by the owner of that ship (individuals, professionals, but also 
public  authorities)  will  be  improved  by  the  new  mechanism  removing  ceilings  and 
making  insurance  obligatory.  Introducing  a  direct  action  will  further  ease  their 
situation. 

Governments (flag States and port States) are affected in that they must set up a system 
for  issuing  and  verifying  financial  guarantee  certificates.  It  should  be  noted  that 
Member  States  are  already  under  this  obligation,  but  that  this  is  limited  to  tankers 
transporting persistent oils. 

The Commission has carried out an impact analysis as part of its Legislative and Work 
Programme, the report on which is available at: 
http://europa.eu.int/comm/secretariat_general/impact/index_en.htm. 

3)  LEGAL ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSAL 

•  Summary of the proposed action 

The  purpose  of  this  proposal  for  a  Directive  is  to  establish  stringent  liability  rules 
applicable  to  all  ships  which  will  help  to  prevent  damage  caused  by  ships  and 
guarantee this is repaired. 

231 

305 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
The  Commission  proposes  that  all  Member  States  ratify  the  1996  Convention  on  the 
Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims as soon as possible and in any case before 
the end of the transposition period for this Directive. It also proposes to incorporate the 
provisions  of  this  convention  into  Community  law..  Furthermore,  the  proposal 
stipulates  that  ships  flying  the  flag  of  a  State  that  is  not  party  to  this  convention  be 
subject  to  a  more  severe  liability  regime  with  gross  negligence  as  conduct  barring 
limitation. This is in line with Article 15(1) of the convention and will foster accession 
to it world-wide.  

In  addition,  in  order  to  better  respond  to  the  interests  of  accident  victims,  the 
Commission considers it necessary to supplement the legislation on liability by setting 
up  a  system  of  obligatory  financial  guarantees  for  shipowners.  The  proposal  for  a 
Directive details both the scope and the conditions of this obligation to have a financial 
guarantee.  Accordingly,  it  is  planned  that,  taking  account  of  the  possible  removal  of 
ceilings  on  liability,  the  financial  guarantee  must  be  a  sum  equivalent  to  double  the 
ceilings  laid  down  in  the  aforementioned  1996  Convention.  In  addition,  the  proposal 
sets up a system for notifying that financial guarantee certificates are on board from the 
point at which ships enter waters under the jurisdiction of the Member States. 

Moreover,  the  proposal  introduces  a  specific  obligation  to  have  a  financial  guarantee 
covering the costs linked to the repatriation of seafarers in case of abandonment. 

Finally,  the  Commission  will  present  to  the  European  Parliament  and  to  the  Council 
five years after the entry into force of this directive a report on the experience gained in 
the application of this directive. 

•  Legal basis 

Article 80(2) of the EC Treaty. 

•  Principle of subsidiarity 

The subsidiarity principle applies as the proposal does not concern an area in which the 
Community has exclusive competence. 

The objectives of the proposal cannot be satisfactorily achieved by action on the part of 
the Member States for the following reasons: 

Under maritime law a State may in principle only apply its own national legislation to 
ships flying its flag and to ships entering its ports. 

Moreover,  there  are  major  disadvantages  in  having  many  different  forms  of  national 
legislation for a global maritime industry. This is why, at a very early stage, States saw 
the benefit of acting together, either at global or regional level.  

The objectives of the proposal may be better achieved through Community action for 
the following reasons: 

Action  at  the  level  of  the  International  Maritime  Organisation  has  limitations.  The 
Conventions  adopted  do  not  have  a  monitoring  system  for  checking  that  they  are 
correctly  implemented  by  contracting  countries,  or  a  mechanism  to  ensure  they  are 

310 

320 

321 

323 

324 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
 
 
325 

327 

331 

332 

341 

342 

uniformly  interpreted.  In  addition,  the  objectives  of  the  conventions  may  not 
correspond  to  citizens’  current  expectations  and  do  not  follow  the  trends  of  modern 
law. 

The  approach  is  therefore  to  establish  a  new,  uniform  legal  framework  at  European 
Union level which will fully enforce the internationally recognised principles and will 
adapt them where necessary. 

Adopting this legal framework will make it possible to coordinate the essential points 
of existing national legislation, such as removing ceilings on civil liability and making 
insurance obligatory. 

The proposal therefore complies with the subsidiarity principle. 

•  Principle of proportionality 

The proposal complies with the principle of proportionality for the following reasons. 

The  minimal  legislation  drawn  up  at  Community  level  ties  in  with  national  civil 
liability  legislation.  As  regards  obligatory  insurance,  the  conditions  for  issuing 
certificates  are  not  harmonised,  but  could  be  if  necessary  through  the  comitology 
process.  

The main administrative expense for national authorities in applying this Directive is in 
issuing  and  verifying  the  insurance  certificates.  The  financial  organisation  of  the 
proposal is based in part on this system of certificates. 

•  Choice of instruments 

Proposed instrument(s): Directive 

Other instruments would not have been adequate for the following reasons: 

A Directive is the instrument best adapted to setting out the basic rules of the new legal 
framework,  which  will  subsequently  be  implemented  by  national  legislation  and 
regulations. 

4)  BUDGETARY IMPACT 

409 

The proposal has no impact on the Community budget. 

5)  ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 

•  Review/revision/sunset clause 

532 

The proposal includes a revision clause. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
550 

•  Correlation table 

The  Member  States  are  required  to  communicate  to  the  Commission  the  text  of 
national  provisions  transposing  the  Directive  as  well  as  a  correlation  table  between 
those provisions and this Directive. 

560 

•  European Economic Area 

This  draft  instrument  concerns  an  area  covered  by  the  EEA  Agreement  and  must 
therefore be extended to the European Economic Area. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
 
2005/0242 (COD) 

Proposal for a 

DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL 

of […] 

on the civil liability and financial guarantees of shipowners 

(Text with EEA relevance) 

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, 

Having  regard  to  the  Treaty  establishing  the  European  Community,  and  in  particular 
Article 80(2) thereof, 

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission1, 

Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee2, 

Having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions3, 

Acting in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 251 of the Treaty4, 

Whereas: 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

One element of Community maritime transport policy is to improve the quality of the 
merchant navy by making all economic operators act more responsibly. 

Dissuasive  measures  have  already  been  adopted  under  Directive 2005/35/EC  of  the 
European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on ship-source pollution 
and on the introduction of penalties for infringements5, supplemented by the Council 
Framework  Decision  2005/667/JHA  of  12  July  2005  to  strengthen  the  criminal-law 
framework for the enforcement of the law against ship-source pollution6. 

The international regime in respect of civil liability and compensation in the event of 
oil pollution should be improved in order to guarantee that operators in the maritime 
transport  chain  ensure  that  oil  is  only  transported  on  board  tankers  of  the  highest 
standard. 

1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 

OJ C […] , […], p. […]. 
OJ C […] , […], p. […]. 
OJ C […] , […], p. […]. 
OJ C […] , […], p. […]. 
OJ L 255, 30.9.2005, p. 11. 
OJ L 255, 30.9.2005, p. 164. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
                                                 
(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

(7) 

(8) 

(9) 

It  is  appropriate  that  the  1996  Protocol  to  the  1976  Convention  on  Limitation  of 
Liability  for  Maritime  Claims  (hereafter  "the  1996  Convention")  be  ratified  by  all 
Member States and by a large number of third countries.  

In order to ensure the full and uniform application of the 1996 Convention throughout 
the  European  Union,  it  is  appropriate  to  incorporate  it  into  Community  law.  The 
Community regime of civil liability should enable shipowners to limit their liability to 
the  ceilings  laid  down  in  that  Convention  and  in  accordance  with  the  provisions 
thereof. 

The obligation to have a financial guarantee should make it possible to ensure better 
protection to victims. It will also help eliminate substandard ships and make it possible 
to  re-establish  competition  between  operators.  Such  an  obligation  is  a  necessary 
complement  to  the  1996  Convention.  In  Resolution  A 898(21),  the  International 
Maritime Organisation recommended that States make financial guarantees obligatory. 
The level of insurance cover should be such as to address situations where the ceilings 
set  by  the  1996  Convention  are  insufficient,  without  imposing  a  disproportionate 
burden on the industry. 

Special  measures  should  be  taken  in  order  to  protect  seafarers  in  the  event  of 
abandonment, 
International  Maritime  Organisation 
Resolution A 930(22). 

basis 

the 

on 

of 

The establishment of certificates proving the existence of a financial guarantee is a key 
element  of  this  Directive,  as  are  the  notification  of  these  certificates,  mutual 
recognition of certificates between Member States and the accessibility of the financial 
guarantee to victims seeking compensation. 

The European Maritime Safety Agency established by Regulation (EC) No 1406/2002 
of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council7  should  provide  the  necessary 
assistance for the purpose of implementing this Directive. 

(10)  The measures necessary for the implementation of this Directive should be adopted in 
accordance  with  Council  Decision  1999/468/EC  of  28  June  1999  laying  down  the 
procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission8.  

(11)  Since the objectives of the action to be taken, namely the introduction of harmonised 
rules  on  liability  and  financial  guarantees  for  shipowners  in  order  to  achieve  high 
quality maritime transport, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and 
can  therefore,  by  reason  of  the  scale  and  effects  of  the  action,  be  better  achieved  at 
Community  level,  the  Community  may  adopt  measures,  in  accordance  with  the 
principle of subsidiarity  as  set  out  in  Article 5 of the Treaty.  In accordance with the 
principle  of  proportionality,  as  set  out  in  that  Article,  this  Directive  does  not  go 
beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives, 

HAVE ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE: 

7 

8 

OJ L 208, 5.8.2002, p. 1. Regulation amended by Regulation (EC) No 724/2004 (OJ L 129, 29.4.2004, 
p. 1). 
OJ L 184, 17.7.1999, p. 23. 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Article 1 

Subject-matter 

This Directive lays down rules applicable to certain aspects of the obligations on operators in 
the  maritime  transport  chain  as  regards  civil  liability  and  introduces  financial  protection 
adapted for seafarers in case of abandonment.  

Article 2 

Definitions 

For the purpose of this Directive: 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

1. 

2. 

“ship”  means  a  seagoing  vessel,  irrespective  of  its  flag,  of  any  type  whatsoever 
operating  in  the  marine  environment  and  includes  hydrofoil  boats,  air-cushion 
vehicles, submersibles and floating craft; 

“shipowner” means the owner of the ship or any other organisation or person, such as 
the  manager  or  the  bareboat  agent  or  charterer,  on  whom  the  shipowner  has 
conferred  responsibility  for  operation  of  the  ship  and  who,  on  assuming  such 
responsibility, has agreed to take over all the duties and responsibilities this involves; 

“civil liability” means the liability giving rise to a claim subject to limitation under 
Article 2  of  the  1996  Convention,  with  the  exception  of  claims  covered  by 
Regulation (EC) No …/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council [on the 
liability of passenger carriers by sea or by inland waterway in the event of accident]9; 

“financial  guarantee”  means  any  financial  guarantee,  such  as  insurance  or  the 
guarantee of a bank or similar financial institution; 

“1996  Convention”  means  the  recapitulative  text  of  the  1976  Convention  on 
Limitation  of  Civil  Liability  for  Maritime  Claims,  adopted  by  the  International 
Maritime Organisation, as amended by the 1996 Protocol; 

“IMO  Resolution A  930(22)”  means  the  Resolution  of  the  Assembly  of  the 
International  Maritime  Organisation  and  the  Governing  Body  of  the  International 
Labour Organisation entitled “Guidelines on provision of financial security in case of 
abandonment of seafarers”. 

Article 3 

Scope 

This  Directive  shall  apply,  in  accordance  with  international  law,  to  maritime  areas 
under the jurisdiction of Member States.  

This Directive shall apply to ships having  a  gross  register  tonnage  of  300  or  more, 
except for the regime of liability laid down in Article 4 which shall apply to all ships. 

9 

OJ L […], […], p. […]. 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
                                                 
3. 

4. 

1. 

2. 

3. 

This Directive shall not apply to warships, auxiliary warships or other State-owned 
or operated ships used for a non-commercial public service. 

This  Directive  shall  be  without  prejudice  to  the  implementation  in  each  Member 
State of the Conventions listed in Annex I. 

Article 4 

Regime of liability 

The Member States shall become contracting parties to the 1996 Convention as soon 
as possible and in any case before the date indicated in Article 13 of this Directive. 

The Member States shall determine the regime of civil liability for shipowners and 
shall  ensure  that  the  right  of  shipowners  to  limit  their  liability  is  governed  by  all 
provisions of the 1996 Convention  

In accordance with Article 15 of the 1996 Convention, Member States shall ensure 
that  Article 4  of  that  Convention  concerning  the  barring  of  limitation  for  liability 
does not apply to ships flying the flag of a State which is not a contracting party to 
the  1996  Convention.  In  such  cases,  the  civil  liability  regime  established  by  the 
Member  States  in  accordance  with  this  Directive  shall  provide  that  the  shipowner 
loses the right to limit his liability if it is proved that the damage resulted from his 
personal act or omission, committed with the intent to cause such damage, or through 
gross negligence. 

Article 5 

Financial guarantee for civil liability 

Each  Member  State  shall  take  the  necessary  measures  to  ensure  that  every  owner  of  a  ship 
flying its flag has a financial guarantee for civil liability. The limit of this guarantee shall not 
be less than double the ceiling laid down in the 1996 Convention. 

Each  Member  State  shall  take  the  necessary  measures  to  ensure  that  every  owner  of  a  ship 
flying the flag of a third country has a financial guarantee in accordance with the provisions 
of  the  first  paragraph  as  soon  as  that  ship  enters  its  exclusive  economic  area  or  equivalent 
area.  The  financial  guarantee  shall  be  valid  for  at  least  three  months  from  the  date  it  is 
required. 

Article 6 

Financial guarantee in case of abandonment of seafarers 

Each  Member  State  shall  take  the  necessary  measures  to  ensure  that  every  owner  of  a  ship 
flying its flag has a financial guarantee to protect the seafarers employed or engaged on board 
the ship in case of abandonment, in accordance with IMO Resolution A 930(22). 

Each  Member  State  shall  take  the  necessary  measures  to  ensure  that  every  owner  of  a  ship 
flying the flag of a third country has a financial guarantee in accordance with the provisions 
of  the  first  paragraph,  as  soon  as  that  ship  enters  a  port  or  an  offshore  terminal  under  its 
jurisdiction or drops anchor in an area under its jurisdiction. 

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
The Member States shall ensure that the system of financial guarantee in case of abandonment 
of seafarers is accessible, in accordance with IMO Resolution A 930(22).  

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

1. 

Article 7 

Financial guarantee certificates 

The  existence  of  the  financial  guarantees  referred  to  in  Articles  5  and  6  and  the 
validity thereof shall be proved by one or more certificates, in accordance with the 
provisions of this Directive, and following the model set out in Annex II. 

Certificates shall be issued by the competent authorities of the Member States once 
they  are  sure  that  the  shipowner  complies  with  the  requirements  laid  down  in  this 
Directive. 

When  a  ship  is  registered  in  a  Member  State,  the  certificates  shall  be  issued  or 
certified by the competent authority of the State in which the ship is registered. 

When a ship is registered in a third country, the certificates may be issued or certified 
by the competent authority of any Member State. 

The  conditions  for  the  issue  and  the  validity  of  the  certificates,  in  particular  the 
criteria and conditions for issue, as well as the measures concerning the providers of 
the financial guarantees, shall be determined in accordance with Article 12(2). 

The certificates shall comply with the model set out in Annex II and shall include the 
following information: 

(a) 

name of ship and registry port; 

(b)  owner’s name and principal place of business; 

(c) 

type of guarantee; 

(d)  name  and  principal  place  of  business  of  insurer  or  other  person  granting  the 
guarantee and, where appropriate, the place of business where the insurance or 
guarantee is established; 

(e) 

the  period  of  validity  of  the  certificate,  which  shall  not  exceed  the  period  of 
validity of the insurance or guarantee. 

The certificates shall be drawn up in the official language(s) of the issuing Member 
State.  If  the  language  used  is  neither  English  nor  French,  the  text  shall  include  a 
translation into one of these languages.  

Article 8 

Notification of the financial guarantee certificate 

The certificate shall be carried on board the ship and a copy shall be deposited with 
the  authority  which  keeps  the  record  of  the  ship's  registry  or,  if  the  ship  is  not 
registered in a Member State, with the authority of the State which issued or certified 
the certificate. 

EN 

14 

   EN 

 
2. 

3. 

4. 

The  operator,  agent  or  captain  of  a  ship  entering  the  exclusive  economic  area  or 
equivalent  area  of  a  Member  State  in  the  cases  set  out  in  Article 5  shall  notify  the 
authorities of that Member State that a financial guarantee certificate is being carried 
on board in accordance with the provisions of Annex III. 

The operator, agent or captain of a ship bound for a port or offshore terminal under 
the jurisdiction of a Member State or which wishes to drop anchor in an area under 
the jurisdiction of a Member State in the cases set out in Article 6, shall notify the 
authorities of that Member State that a financial guarantee certificate is being carried 
on board in accordance with the provisions of Annex III.  

The  competent  authorities  of  the  Member  States  shall  be  able  to  share  the 
information  provided  for  in  paragraph  1  through  the  SafeSeaNet  Community 
platform for maritime data exchange. 

Article 9 

Mutual recognition by Member States of financial guarantee certificates 

Each  Member  State  shall  recognise  certificates issued  or  certified  by  another  Member  State 
under Article 7 for all purposes of this Directive and shall consider them as having the same 
value as certificates which it issued or certified itself, even when the ship is not registered in a 
Member State. 

A Member State may at any time request an exchange of views with the issuing or certifying 
State should it believe that the insurer or guarantor named on the certificate is not financially 
capable of meeting the obligations imposed by this Directive. 

Article 10 

Direct action against the provider of the financial guarantee for civil liability 

Any requests for compensation for damage caused by the ship may be addressed directly to 
the provider of the financial guarantee for civil liability covering the owner’s civil liability.  

The provider of the  financial  guarantee may rely on the means of  defence which  the  owner 
himself would be entitled to invoke, with the exception of those based on the owner declaring 
bankruptcy or going into liquidation.  

The  provider  of  the  financial  guarantee  may  also  rely  on  the  fact  that  the  damage  was  the 
result  of  intentional  fault  on  the  part  of  the  owner.  However,  it  may  not  rely  on  any  of  the 
means of defence which it could have invoked in an action brought against it by the owner.  

The provider of the financial guarantee may, in all cases, require the owner to be joined in the 
proceedings. 

Article 11 

Reports 

Five  years  after  this  Directive  enters  into  force  the  Member  States  shall  report  to  the 
Commission  on  the  experience  gained  in  applying  the  Directive.  On  this  basis,  the 
Commission shall present a report to the European Parliament and the Council including those 
proposals for amendments to this Directive which it considers relevant. 

EN 

15 

   EN 

 
Article 12 

Committee 

The Commission shall be assisted by the Committee on Safe Seas and the Prevention 
of  Pollution  from  Ships  (COSS),  established  by  Article 3  of  Regulation  (EC) 
No 2099/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council10. 

reference 

Where 
and  7  of 
Decision 1999/468/EC  shall  apply,  having  regard  to  the  provisions  of  Article 8 
thereof.  

this  paragraph,  Articles 5 

is  made 

to 

1. 

2. 

The  period  provided  for  in  Article 5(6)  of  Decision 1999/468/EC  shall  be  three 
months. 

3. 

The committee shall adopt its rules of Procedure. 

Article 13 

Transposition 

1. 

Member  States  shall  bring  into  force  the  laws,  regulations  and  administrative 
provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by […] [18 months after date of 
entry into force] at the latest. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission 
the text of those provisions and a correlation table between those provisions and this 
Directive. 

When  Member  States  adopt  those  provisions  they  shall  contain  a  reference  to  this 
Directive  or  be  accompanied  by  such  a  reference  on  the  occasion  of  their  official 
publication. Member States shall determine how such reference is to be made. 

2. 

Member States shall communicate to the Commission the text of the main provisions 
of national law which they adopt in the field covered by this Directive. 

Article 14 

Entry into force 

This  Directive  shall  enter  into  force  on  the  […]  day  following  that  of  its  publication  in  the 
Official Journal of the European Union. 

10 

OJ L 324, 29.11.2002, p. 1. 

EN 

16 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Article 15 

Addressees 

This Directive is addressed to the Member States. 

Done at Brussels, […] 

For the European Parliament 
The President 
[…] 

For the Council 
The President 
[…] 

EN 

17 

   EN 

 
ANNEX I 

– 

– 

– 

The International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage, 1992. 

The International Convention of 1996 on Liability and Compensation for Damage in 
Connection  with  the  Carriage  of  Hazardous  and  Noxious  Substances  by  Sea  (HNS 
Convention). 

The  International  Convention  on  Civil  Liability  for  Bunker  Oil  Pollution  Damage, 
2001 (“Bunker Oil” Convention). 

EN 

18 

   EN 

 
ANNEX II 

Model financial guarantee certificate 

Name of ship 

Distinctive letter or 
number 

Registry port 

Name and address of 
owner 

I,  the  undersigned,  certify  that  the  above  ship  is  covered  by  an  insurance  policy  or  other 
financial guarantee which meets the requirements of Directive 200./../EC on civil liability and 
financial guarantees for shipowners. 

Type of guarantee ……………………………………………………………… 

Duration of the guarantee …………………………………………………………… 

Name and address of the insurer(s) and/or guarantor(s) 

Name ……………………………………………………………………… 

Address …………………………………………………………………. 

This certificate is valid until ………………………………… 

Issued or certified by the Government of ………………………………… 

Done at…………………..on…………… 

Signature and name of official who issued or certified the certificate 

EN 

19 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX III 

List of information to be notified under Article 8 of this Directive 

Ship identification (name, call sign, IMO identification number, MMSI number) 

Date and time 

Position in latitude and longitude or true bearing and distance in nautical miles from 
a clearly identified landmark 

Port of destination 

Estimated time of arrival at the port of destination or pilot station, as required by the 
competent authority, and estimated time of departure from that port 

Financial guarantee certificate carried on board 

Address from which detailed information on the certificate may be obtained 

1) 

2) 

3) 

4) 

5) 

6) 

7) 

As far as possible, the information provided for under 6) and 7) may be communicated with 
other  notifications  as  long  as  this  complies  with  the  conditions  laid  down  in  Article 8(2)  of 
this Directive. 

EN 

20 

   EN 

 
LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL STATEMENT 

1. 

NAME OF THE PROPOSAL: 

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the civil liability 
and financial guarantees of shipowners 

2. 

ABM / ABB FRAMEWORK 

Policy area: Energy and Transport 

Activities: Maritime and river transport, intermodality. 

3. 

BUDGET LINES 

3.1. 

Budget  lines  (operational  lines  and  related  technical  and  administrative  assistance  lines 
(ex-BA lines)) including headings: Not applicable 

3.2. 

Duration of the action and of the financial impact: Not applicable 

3.3. 

Budgetary characteristics (add rows if necessary): Not applicable 

Budget 
line 

Type of expenditure 

New 

EFTA 
contribution 

Contributions 
from applicant 
countries 

Heading in 
financial 
perspective 

Comp/ 
Non-
comp 

Comp/ 
Non-
comp 

Diff1/No
n-diff2 

Diff/No
n-diff 

YES/ NO 

YES/ NO 

YES/ NO 

No […] 

YES/ NO 

YES/ NO 

YES/ NO 

No […] 

1 
2 

Differentiated appropriations. 
Non-differentiated appropriations. 

EN 

21 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
4. 

SUMMARY OF RESOURCES 

4.1. 

Financial Resources 

4.1.1. 

Summary of commitment appropriations (CA) and payment appropriations (PA) 

EUR million (to 3 decimal places) 

Section 
no. 

Expenditure type 
Operational expenditure3 

Year n 

n +1 

n +2 

n +3 

n +4 

8.1 

Commitment 
Appropriations (CA) 
Payment  Appropriations 
(PA) 
Administrative expenditure within reference amount4 

b 

a 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Technical and 
administrative assistance 
(NDA) 
TOTAL REFERENCE AMOUNT 

8.2.4 

c 

0 

0 

0 

Commitment 
Appropriations 

Payment 
Appropriations 

0 

0 

a+c 

b+c 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

n  +  5 
and 
later 

Total 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Administrative expenditure not included in reference amount5 

resources 

and 
expenditure 

Human 
associated 
(NDA) 
costs, 
Administrative 
other 
human 
than 
resources  and  associated 
costs,  not 
in 
reference amount (NDA) 

included 

8.2.5 

8.2.6 

d 

e 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0

0

0

0

3 
4 
5 

Expenditure that does not fall under Chapter xx 01 of the Title xx concerned. 
Expenditure within Article xx 01 04 of Title xx. 
Expenditure within Chapter xx 01 other than Articles xx 01 04 or xx 01 05. 

EN 

22 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Total indicative financial cost of intervention 

TOTAL  CA 
cost 
of 
Resources 

TOTAL  PA 
cost 
of 
Resources 

including 
Human 

including 
Human 

Co-financing details 

a+c
+d+
e 

b+c
+d+
e 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0

0

0

0

The legislative proposal does not provide for cofinancing on the part of the Member States 

EUR Million (to 3rd decimal place) 

Co-financing body 

…………………… 
TOTAL  CA  including 
co-financing 

f 
a+c+d
+e+f 

n +1 

n +2 

n +3 

n +4 

Year 
n 

0 
0 

0 
0 

0 
0 

0 
0 

0 
0 

n+5 
and 
later 
0
0

Total 

0 
0 

4.1.2.  Compatibility with financial programming 

  Proposal is compatible with existing financial programming. 

Proposal  will  entail  reprogramming  of  the  relevant  heading  in  the  financial 

(cid:133) 
perspective. 

Proposal  may  require  application  of  the  provisions  of  the  Interinstitutional 

(cid:133) 
Agreement6 (i.e. flexibility instrument or revision of the financial perspective). 

4.1.3.  Financial impact on revenue 

  Proposal has no financial impact on revenue 

(cid:133) 

Proposal has financial impact – the effect on revenue is as follows: 

NB:  all  details  and  observations  relating  to  the  method  of  calculating  the  effect  on 
revenue should be shown in a separate annex. 

6 

See points 19 and 24 of the Interinstitutional Agreement. 

EN 

23 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
EUR million (to one decimal place) 

Budget 
line 

Revenue 

Situation following action 

[n+1] 

[n+2] 

[n+3] 

[n+4] 

[n+5]7 

[Year 
n] 

Prior 
to 
action 
[Year 
n-1] 

a)  Revenue  in  absolute 
terms 

b) Change in revenue 

 ∆ 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

4.2. 

Human Resources FTE (including officials, temporary and external staff) – see details 
under point 8.2.1. 

No impact on staff expenditure. Management by existing staff. 

Annual requirements 

Total  number  of  human 
resources 

Year  n 
(2007*) 

n +1 

n +2 

n +3 

n +4 

n+5  and 
later 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

5. 

CHARACTERISTICS AND OBJECTIVES 

5.1. 

Need to be met in the short or long term 

The international rules on the civil liability of  shipowners  are unsatisfactory because they 
do not actually help prevent damage or ensure that this is made good. 

Non-discriminatory  rules  applicable  to  all  ships,  irrespective  of  their  flag,  which  help  to 
prevent  damage  caused  by  ships  and  ensure  that  it  is  made  good  should  be  added  to 
Community legislation. 

5.2. 

Value-added  of  Community  involvement  and  coherence  of  the  proposal  with  other 
financial instruments and possible synergy 

The  Commission  intends  to  work  to  improve  the  CLC  Convention,  for  example  by 
removing  the  ceiling  on  civil  liability.  By  following  this  approach  the  Commission  is 
responding  to  concerns  expressed  both  by  the  European  Parliament  and  the  European 
Council.  

On  21 March 2004  the  European  Parliament  called  for  “a  comprehensive  and  cohesive 
European  maritime  policy,  which  would  have  as  its  objective  the  creation  of  a  European 

7 

Additional columns should be added if necessary, i.e. if the duration of the action exceeds 6 years. 

EN 

24 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
maritime safety area (…) based on (…) the introduction of a system of liability covering the 
entire maritime transport chain (…)”. 

5.3. 

Objectives, expected results and related indicators of the proposal in the context of the 
ABM framework 

The objective is to establish non-discriminatory rules, applicable to all ships irrespective of 
their flag, which will make a real contribution towards preventing damage caused by ships 
and to ensuring that damage is made good: 

•  in order to ensure such damage is better prevented, the Commission considers it vital to 

remove ceilings on civil liability. 

•  in  addition,  in  order  to  better  respond  to  the  interests  of  victims  of  accidents,  the 
Commission  considers  it  necessary  to  supplement  the  legislation  on  liability  by  setting 
up a system of obligatory financial guaranties for shipowners.  

The proposed Directive details both the scope and the conditions of the obligation to have a 
financial  guarantee.  Accordingly,  to  take  account  of  the  possible  removal  of  ceilings  on 
liability, it is proposed that the financial guarantee will be a sum equivalent to double the 
ceilings  laid  down  in  the  1996 Protocol  to  the  Convention  on  Limitation  of  Liability  for 
Maritime Claims. 

5.4.  Method of implementation (indicative) 

Show below the method(s)8 chosen for the implementation of the action. 

(cid:133) Centralised Management 

(cid:133) 

Directly by the Commission 
Indirectly by delegation to: 
(cid:133) 
Executive agencies 
(cid:133) 
Bodies  set  up  by  the  Communities,  as  referred  to  in  Article 185  of  the  Financial 

Regulation, 

(cid:133) 

National public-sector bodies/bodies with public-service mission 

(cid:133) Shared or decentralised management 
(cid:133)  With Member States 
(cid:133)  With third countries 
(cid:133) Joint management with international organisations (please specify) 

Relevant comments: 

8 

If a number of methods are indicated, please provide details in the “Comments” section. 

EN 

25 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
6. 

MONITORING AND EVALUATION 

The draft Directive includes a provision requiring Member States to notify the Commission 
of the national implementing measures (NIM) to be adopted with a view to transposing the 
Directive into national law.  

In  the  event  of  failure  to  communicate  these  national  implementing  measures  (as  well  as 
incomplete notification thereof) infringement procedures will automatically be launched in 
accordance with Article 226 of the Treaty. 

6.1. 

Evaluation: 

6.1.1.  Ex ante evaluation 

The following potential impacts have been identified in the impact analysis: 

•  Responsible owners will gain most from the new system in that they already have a civil 
liability policy for damage caused by their ships to third parties and competition on the 
market  will  not  be  distorted  by  the  actions  of  unscrupulous  operators  who  have  no 
insurance.  

•  In  terms  of  removing  ceilings,  only  shipowners  guilty  of  gross  negligence  will  be 
affected,  to  the  advantage  of  responsible  owners  who  will  continue  to  enjoy  the 
protection of limited liability. 

•  Insurers will not necessarily see an increase in the number of insurance policies, nor will 
they be more exposed to risk since it is their responsibility to ensure – in the same way as 
other links in the maritime transport chain – that the ships which they insure comply with 
international standards.  

•  The  other  operators  in  the  maritime  transport  chain  may  be  affected  is  any  additional 
costs  incurred  by  the  owner  are  passed  on  to  them.  However,  we  have  seen  that  more 
widespread insurance should not lead to additional expenses. In practical terms, the crew 
and  the  ship  owner’s  agents  should  follow  the  procedures  for  notifying  that  there  is  a 
certificate  on  board.  The  crew  will  also  benefit  from  the  protection  afforded  by  the 
financial guarantee for the repatriation of seafarers. 

•  “Coastal residents” (any person who  may be affected  by damage caused by a ship and 
who  may  demand  that  the  ship  owner  repair  this  damage,  including  individuals, 
professionals  but  also  public  authorities).  The  situation  of  coastal  residents  will  be 
improved  by  the  new  obligatory  insurance  mechanism.  Introducing  a  direct  action  will 
ease their situation further still. Coastal residents will be the first to benefit from the new 
system of obligatory insurance. 

•  Governments (flag States and port States) are affected in that they must set up a system 
for issuing and verifying financial guarantee certificates. The Member States are already 

EN 

26 

   EN 

 
obliged to do this under the CLC system, but the obligation only applies to tankers. Third 
countries which have adopted a system of obligatory insurance for all types of ships have 
designated specialised teams. 

6.1.2.  Measures taken following an intermediate/ex-post evaluation (lessons learned from similar 

experiences in the past). 

Not applicable 

6.1.3.  Terms and frequency of future evaluation 

Not applicable. 

7. 

ANTI-FRAUD MEASURES 

Not applicable. 

EN 

27 

   EN 

 
8. 

DETAILS OF RESOURCES 

8.1 

Objectives of the proposal in terms of their financial cost: Not applicable 

Type 
of 
output 

Av. 
cost 

Year n 

Year n+1 

Year n+2 

Year n+3 

Year n+4 

No. 
outputs 

Total 
cost 

No. 
outputs 

Total 
cost 

No. 
outputs 

Total 
cost 

No. 
outputs 

Total 
cost 

No. 
outputs 

Total 
cost 

Year  n+5  and 
later 
No. 
outputs 

Total 
cost 

TOTAL 

No. 
outputs 

Total 
cost 

Commitment appropriations in EUR million (to 3 decimal places) 

(Headings of 
Objectives, 
actions and 
outputs should 
be provided) 
OPERATIONAL 
OBJECTIVE 
No 19…………
……. 

Action 1……… 
- Output 1 

- Output 2 

Action 2……… 
- Output 1 

Sub-total 
Objective 1 
OPERATIONAL 
OBJECTIVE 
No 2… 
Action 1……… 
- Output 1 

Sub-total 
Objective 2 

9 

As described under Section 5.3. 

EN 

28 

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
OPERATIONAL 
OBJECTIVE 
No°n 
Sub-total 
objective n 1 
TOTAL COST 

EN 

29 

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
8.2 

Administrative expenditure 

8.2.1  Number and type of human resources 

Types of post 

Staff  to  be  assigned  to  management  of  the  action  using  existing  and/or  additional 
resources (number of posts/FTEs) 

Year n 

Year n+1 

Year n+2 

Year n+3 

Year n+4 

Year n+5 

or 

Officials 
temporary 
staff10 
(06 01 01) 

financed11 

Staff 
Art. XX 01 02 

A*/
AD 

B*, 
C*/
AST 

by 

Other  staff  financed12 
by Art. XX 01 04/05 

TOTAL 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

8.2.2  Description of tasks deriving from the action: Tasks 

Not applicable 

8.2.3 

Sources of human resources (statutory) 

Posts  currently  allocated  to  the  management  of  the  programme  to  be  replaced  or 

(cid:133) 
extended 

(cid:133) 

(cid:133) 

Posts pre-allocated within the APS/PDB exercise for year n 

Posts to be requested in the next APS/PDB procedure 

Posts to be redeployed using existing resources within the managing service (internal 

(cid:133) 
redeployment) 

Posts required for year n although not foreseen in the APS/PDB exercise of the year in 

(cid:133) 
question 

10 
11 
12 

Cost of which is NOT covered by the reference amount. 
Cost of which is NOT covered by the reference amount. 
Cost of which is included within the reference amount. 

EN 

30 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
8.2.4  Other  administrative  expenditure  included  in  reference  amount  (XX  01  04/05  – 

Expenditure on administrative management) 

Budget line 
(Number and heading) 
1. 
and 
administrative 
assistance 
(including related staff costs) 
 Executive agencies13 

Technical 

technical 

Other 
administrative assistance 
- intra muros 

and 

- extra muros 
Total 
administrative assistance 

technical 

and 

Year n 

Year 
n+1 

Year 
n+2 

Year 
n+3 

Year 
n+4 

Year n+5 
and later 

TOTAL 

EUR million (to 3 decimal places) 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

8.2.5 

Financial cost of human resources and associated costs not included in the reference 
amount 

Type of human resources 

Year n 

Year 
n+1 

Year 
n+2 

Year n+3  Year n+4  Year n+5 
and later 

EUR million (to 3 decimal places) 

and 

staff 

temporary 

financed  by  Art.  XX 01 02 

Officials 
(06 01 01) 
Staff 
(auxiliary, END, contract staff, etc.) 
(specify budget line) 
Total  cost  of  human  resources  and 
associated  costs  (NOT  in  reference 
amount) 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Calculation– Officials and Temporary agents 

Not applicable 

Calculation– Staff financed under Article XX 01 02 

Not applicable 

13 

Reference  should  be  made  to  the  specific  legislative  financial  statement  for  the  Executive 
Agency/Agencies concerned. 

EN 

31 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
8.2.6  Other administrative expenditure not included in reference amount 

EUR million (to 3 decimal places) 

Year 
n 

Year 
n+1 

Year 
n+2 

Year 
n+3 

Year 
n+4 

TOTAL 

Year 
n+5 
and 
later 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0* 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

XX 01 02 11 01 – Missions 

XX 01 02 11 02 – Meetings and 
conferences 
XX 01 02 11 03 – Committees14 

XX 01 02 11 04 - Studies and consultations 

XX 01 02 11 05 - Information systems 

2. Total other management expenditure 
(XX 01 02 11) 
3. Other expenditure of an administrative 
nature (specify including reference to 
budget line) 
Total administrative expenditure, other 
than human resources and associated 
costs (NOT included in reference 
amount) 

* 

No impact on the current budget for missions 

Calculation - Other administrative expenditure not included in reference amount 

Not applicable 

14 

Specify the type of committee and the group to which it belongs. 

EN 

32 

   EN