natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In line with the rapporteur’s position, a different implementation deadline for domestic ferry lines should be offered to carriers so as to ensure efficient and financially sustainable civil liability coverage.
In line with the rapporteur’s position, a different implementation deadline for domestic ferry lines should be offered to carriers so as to ensure efficient and financially sustainable civil liability coverage.
The provision concerning the regions described in Article 299(2) of the EC Treaty makes it possible to set a different implementation deadline for domestic ferry lines in these regions in order to ensure efficient and financially sustainable civil liability coverage that is adapted to the permanent constraints on these regions.
The provision concerning the regions described in Article 299(2) of the EC Treaty makes it possible to set a different implementation deadline for domestic ferry lines in these regions in order to ensure efficient and financially sustainable civil liability coverage that is adapted to the permanent constraints on these regions.
EU passengers' rights have been firmly present on the agenda of the common transport policy since the publication of Commission's White paper in 2001
EU passengers' rights have been firmly present on the agenda of the common transport policy since the publication of Commission's White paper in 2001
White Paper “European transport policy for 2010: time to decide”, COM(2001)0370 of 12.9.2001. .
White Paper “European transport policy for 2010: time to decide”, COM(2001)0370 of 12.9.2001. .
As an integral part of this agenda, the protection of EU passengers under an efficient system of liability has been relayed in the different transport modes through the ratification of the Montreal Convention
As an integral part of this agenda, the protection of EU passengers under an efficient system of liability has been relayed in the different transport modes through the ratification of the Montreal Convention
Council Decision (2001/539/EC) of 5 April 2001 on the conclusion by the European Community of the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air (the Montreal Convention). and additional EC rules
Council Decision (2001/539/EC) of 5 April 2001 on the conclusion by the European Community of the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air (the Montreal Convention). and additional EC rules
Regulation (2027/1997) on air carrier liability in case of accidents as modified by Regulation (889/2002/EC). for air transport and through the publication of Commission's Proposal of Regulation on International Rail Passengers’ Rights and Obligations
Regulation (2027/1997) on air carrier liability in case of accidents as modified by Regulation (889/2002/EC). for air transport and through the publication of Commission's Proposal of Regulation on International Rail Passengers’ Rights and Obligations
COM(2004)0143 , amended by TRAN (Report EP/ TRAN ( A6-0123/2005 )) .
COM(2004)0143 , amended by TRAN (Report EP/ TRAN ( A6-0123/2005 )) .
As far as passengers by sea are concerned, the implementation of a liability system in EC has been more complex.
As far as passengers by sea are concerned, the implementation of a liability system in EC has been more complex.
The Commission presented on 24 June 2003 a proposal for a Council decision concerning the conclusion by the European Community of the Protocol of 2002 to the Athens Convention relating to the Carriage of Passengers and their Luggage by Sea
The Commission presented on 24 June 2003 a proposal for a Council decision concerning the conclusion by the European Community of the Protocol of 2002 to the Athens Convention relating to the Carriage of Passengers and their Luggage by Sea
COM(2003)0375 . , the Commission proposed that the Community becomes a Contracting Party to the Protocol at the earliest possible moment and that the Member States shall do likewise before the end of 2005.
COM(2003)0375 . , the Commission proposed that the Community becomes a Contracting Party to the Protocol at the earliest possible moment and that the Member States shall do likewise before the end of 2005.
As no progress has been made on this Proposal within the Council, the Proposal under examination now aims at incorporating the Athens Convention into EC law and adds some adaptations to it, in particular on its scope of implementation.
As no progress has been made on this Proposal within the Council, the Proposal under examination now aims at incorporating the Athens Convention into EC law and adds some adaptations to it, in particular on its scope of implementation.
The proposal will guarantee a level playing field at EU level for civil liability concerning damages caused to passengers and to their belongings, by ship.
The proposal will guarantee a level playing field at EU level for civil liability concerning damages caused to passengers and to their belongings, by ship.
The overall objective followed by Commission has to be upheld.
The overall objective followed by Commission has to be upheld.
Issues of primary importance are tackled and the Proposal should provide to passengers by sea a comprehensive liability scheme, offering a good harmonised basis on civil liability.
Issues of primary importance are tackled and the Proposal should provide to passengers by sea a comprehensive liability scheme, offering a good harmonised basis on civil liability.
The Athens Convention
The Athens Convention
The Protocol of 2002 to the Athens Convention Relating to the Carriage of Passengers and their Luggage by Sea, 1974, was adopted on 1 November 2002.
The Protocol of 2002 to the Athens Convention Relating to the Carriage of Passengers and their Luggage by Sea, 1974, was adopted on 1 November 2002.
The 2002 protocol should enter into force 12 months after being accepted by 10 States, which is not yet the case.
The 2002 protocol should enter into force 12 months after being accepted by 10 States, which is not yet the case.
The EU Member States which have signed the 2002 protocol are: FI, DE, ES, SE, UK
The EU Member States which have signed the 2002 protocol are: FI, DE, ES, SE, UK
The Protocol introduces compulsory insurance to cover passengers on ships and raises the limits of liability.
The Protocol introduces compulsory insurance to cover passengers on ships and raises the limits of liability.
It also introduces other mechanisms to assist passengers in obtaining compensation, based on well-accepted principles applied in existing liability and compensation regimes dealing with environmental pollution.
It also introduces other mechanisms to assist passengers in obtaining compensation, based on well-accepted principles applied in existing liability and compensation regimes dealing with environmental pollution.
These include replacing the fault-based liability system with a strict liability system for shipping related incidents, backed by the requirement that the carrier take out compulsory insurance to cover these potential claims.
These include replacing the fault-based liability system with a strict liability system for shipping related incidents, backed by the requirement that the carrier take out compulsory insurance to cover these potential claims.
The limits contained in the Protocol set a maximum limit, empowering - but not obliging - national courts to compensate for death, injury or damage up to these limits.
The limits contained in the Protocol set a maximum limit, empowering - but not obliging - national courts to compensate for death, injury or damage up to these limits.
The Protocol also includes an "opt-out" clause, enabling State Parties to retain or introduce higher limits of liability (or unlimited liability) in the case of carriers who are subject to the jurisdiction of their courts.
The Protocol also includes an "opt-out" clause, enabling State Parties to retain or introduce higher limits of liability (or unlimited liability) in the case of carriers who are subject to the jurisdiction of their courts.
Compulsory insurance
Compulsory insurance
A new Article 4bis of the Convention requires carriers to maintain insurance or other financial security, such as the guarantee of a bank or similar financial institution, to cover the limits for strict liability under the Convention in respect of the death of and personal injury to passengers.
A new Article 4bis of the Convention requires carriers to maintain insurance or other financial security, such as the guarantee of a bank or similar financial institution, to cover the limits for strict liability under the Convention in respect of the death of and personal injury to passengers.
The limit of the compulsory insurance or other financial security shall not be less than 250,000 Special Drawing Rights (SDR) (about Euros 300 000) per passenger on each distinct occasion.
The limit of the compulsory insurance or other financial security shall not be less than 250,000 Special Drawing Rights (SDR) (about Euros 300 000) per passenger on each distinct occasion.
Ships are to be issued with a certificate attesting that insurance or other financial security is in force and a model certificate is attached to the Protocol in an Annex.
Ships are to be issued with a certificate attesting that insurance or other financial security is in force and a model certificate is attached to the Protocol in an Annex.
Limits of liability
Limits of liability
The limits of liability have been raised significantly under the Protocol, to reflect present day conditions and the mechanism for raising limits in the future has been made easier.
The limits of liability have been raised significantly under the Protocol, to reflect present day conditions and the mechanism for raising limits in the future has been made easier.
The carrier is liable, unless the carrier proves that the incident resulted from an act of war, hostilities, civil war, insurrection or a natural phenomenon of an exceptional, inevitable and irresistible character; or was wholly caused by an act or omission done with the intent to cause the incident by a third party.
The carrier is liable, unless the carrier proves that the incident resulted from an act of war, hostilities, civil war, insurrection or a natural phenomenon of an exceptional, inevitable and irresistible character; or was wholly caused by an act or omission done with the intent to cause the incident by a third party.
If the loss exceeds the limit, the carrier is further liable - up to a limit of 400,000 SDR (480 000 euros) per passenger on each distinct occasion - unless the carrier proves that the incident which caused the loss occurred without the fault or neglect of the carrier.
If the loss exceeds the limit, the carrier is further liable - up to a limit of 400,000 SDR (480 000 euros) per passenger on each distinct occasion - unless the carrier proves that the incident which caused the loss occurred without the fault or neglect of the carrier.
For the loss suffered as a result of the death of or personal injury to a passenger not caused by a shipping incident, the carrier is liable if the incident which caused the loss was due to the fault or neglect of the carrier.
For the loss suffered as a result of the death of or personal injury to a passenger not caused by a shipping incident, the carrier is liable if the incident which caused the loss was due to the fault or neglect of the carrier.
The burden of proving fault or neglect lies with the claimant.
The burden of proving fault or neglect lies with the claimant.
The liability of the carrier only includes loss arising from incidents that occurred in the course of the carriage.
The liability of the carrier only includes loss arising from incidents that occurred in the course of the carriage.
The burden of proving that the incident which caused the loss occurred in the course of the carriage, and the extent of the loss, lies with the claimant.
The burden of proving that the incident which caused the loss occurred in the course of the carriage, and the extent of the loss, lies with the claimant.
Loss of or damage to luggage and vehicles:
Loss of or damage to luggage and vehicles:
- The liability of the carrier for the loss of or damage to cabin luggage is limited to 2,250 SDR per passenger, per carriage.
- The liability of the carrier for the loss of or damage to cabin luggage is limited to 2,250 SDR per passenger, per carriage.
- The liability of the carrier for the loss of or damage to vehicles including all luggages carried in or on the vehicle is limited to 12,700 SDR per vehicle, per carriage.
- The liability of the carrier for the loss of or damage to vehicles including all luggages carried in or on the vehicle is limited to 12,700 SDR per vehicle, per carriage.
- The liability of the carrier for the loss of or damage to other luggage is limited to 3,375 SDR per passenger, per carriage.
- The liability of the carrier for the loss of or damage to other luggage is limited to 3,375 SDR per passenger, per carriage.
- The carrier and the passenger may agree that the liability of the carrier shall be subject to a deductible not exceeding 330 SDR in the case of damage to a vehicle and not exceeding 149 SDR per passenger in the case of loss of or damage to other luggage, such sum to be deducted from the loss or damage.
- The carrier and the passenger may agree that the liability of the carrier shall be subject to a deductible not exceeding 330 SDR in the case of damage to a vehicle and not exceeding 149 SDR per passenger in the case of loss of or damage to other luggage, such sum to be deducted from the loss or damage.
The Protocol allows a State Party to regulate by specific provisions of national law the limit of liability for personal injury and death , provided that the national limit of liability, if any, is not lower than that prescribed in the Protocol.
The Protocol allows a State Party to regulate by specific provisions of national law the limit of liability for personal injury and death , provided that the national limit of liability, if any, is not lower than that prescribed in the Protocol.
Amendment of limits
Amendment of limits
The 2002 Protocol introduces a new tacit acceptance procedure for raising the limits of liability.
The 2002 Protocol introduces a new tacit acceptance procedure for raising the limits of liability.
A proposal to amend the limits, as requested by at least one-half of the Parties to the Protocol, would be circulated to all IMO Member States and al States Parties and would then be discussed in the IMO Legal Committee.
A proposal to amend the limits, as requested by at least one-half of the Parties to the Protocol, would be circulated to all IMO Member States and al States Parties and would then be discussed in the IMO Legal Committee.
Amendments would be adopted by a two-thirds majority of the States Parties to the Convention as amended by the Protocol present and voting in the Legal Committee, and amendments would enter into force 18 months after its deemed acceptance date.
Amendments would be adopted by a two-thirds majority of the States Parties to the Convention as amended by the Protocol present and voting in the Legal Committee, and amendments would enter into force 18 months after its deemed acceptance date.
The deemed acceptance date would be 18 months after adoption, unless within that period not less than one fourth of the States that were States Parties at the time of the adoption of the amendment have communicated to the IMO Secretary-General that they do not accept the amendment.
The deemed acceptance date would be 18 months after adoption, unless within that period not less than one fourth of the States that were States Parties at the time of the adoption of the amendment have communicated to the IMO Secretary-General that they do not accept the amendment.
Regional Economic Integration Organizations
Regional Economic Integration Organizations
For the first time in an IMO Convention, a regional economic integration organization may sign up the document.
For the first time in an IMO Convention, a regional economic integration organization may sign up the document.
An article in the Protocol states that a Regional Economic Integration Organization, which is constituted by sovereign States that have transferred competence over certain matters governed by this Protocol to that Organization, may sign, ratify, accept, approve or accede to the Protocol.
An article in the Protocol states that a Regional Economic Integration Organization, which is constituted by sovereign States that have transferred competence over certain matters governed by this Protocol to that Organization, may sign, ratify, accept, approve or accede to the Protocol.
A Regional Economic Integration Organization which is a Party to this Protocol will have the rights and obligations of a State Party, to the extent that the Regional Economic Integration Organization has competence over matters governed by this Protocol.
A Regional Economic Integration Organization which is a Party to this Protocol will have the rights and obligations of a State Party, to the extent that the Regional Economic Integration Organization has competence over matters governed by this Protocol.
What are the current rules governing liability for transport of passengers by sea in the EU?
What are the current rules governing liability for transport of passengers by sea in the EU?
As long as the Athens Convention is not approved and/or incorporated in EU law, liability issues for passengers by sea will be governed by two sets of law: the internal law of the Member States and the international law for those Member States that have ratified the 1976 Convention on Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims (LLMC)
As long as the Athens Convention is not approved and/or incorporated in EU law, liability issues for passengers by sea will be governed by two sets of law: the internal law of the Member States and the international law for those Member States that have ratified the 1976 Convention on Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims (LLMC)
FR, LT, NL have ratified the LLMC 1976 but not the Athens Convention. or its 1996 Protocol
FR, LT, NL have ratified the LLMC 1976 but not the Athens Convention. or its 1996 Protocol
DK, FI, DE and MT have ratified the LLMC 1996 Protocol but not the Athens Convention. .
DK, FI, DE and MT have ratified the LLMC 1996 Protocol but not the Athens Convention. .
The liability ceiling foreseen in the two versions of the LLMC are different, the 1996 Protocol which is more "generous" however has a lower liability ceiling than the one foreseen in the Athens Convention. (see table)
The liability ceiling foreseen in the two versions of the LLMC are different, the 1996 Protocol which is more "generous" however has a lower liability ceiling than the one foreseen in the Athens Convention. (see table)
Maximal amount of reparation per passenger
Maximal amount of reparation per passenger
Athens Convention (1974)
Athens Convention (1974)
- 46 666 SDR
- 46 666 SDR
56 000 €.
56 000 €.
Athens Convention (as modified in 2002)
Athens Convention (as modified in 2002)
- 250 000 SDR
- 250 000 SDR
300 000 €. (full liability for maritime incidents)
300 000 €. (full liability for maritime incidents)
- 400 000 SDR
- 400 000 SDR
480 000 €. (liability for fault)
480 000 €. (liability for fault)
LLMC 1976
LLMC 1976
46 666 SDR
46 666 SDR
with a global limitation of 25 millions SDR
with a global limitation of 25 millions SDR
30 millions €.
30 millions €.
LLMC 1996 Protocol
LLMC 1996 Protocol
175 000 SDR
175 000 SDR
210 000 €.
210 000 €.
The incorporation of the Athens Convention in EC law would thus give a stronger protection for passengers at EU level while generating some difficulties as regard the coordination of these sets of law.
The incorporation of the Athens Convention in EC law would thus give a stronger protection for passengers at EU level while generating some difficulties as regard the coordination of these sets of law.
Additional provisions to Athens Convention in the Proposal
Additional provisions to Athens Convention in the Proposal
Extension of the scope of application to domestic traffic (cabotage) and inland waterways: The scope of the proposed Regulation is wider compared to the scope of the Athens Convention 2002.
Extension of the scope of application to domestic traffic (cabotage) and inland waterways: The scope of the proposed Regulation is wider compared to the scope of the Athens Convention 2002.
It covers the scope of the Athens Convention (in order to make the whole Convention fully enforceable within the EU), but is extended to carriage within a single Member State and traffic on inland waterway.
It covers the scope of the Athens Convention (in order to make the whole Convention fully enforceable within the EU), but is extended to carriage within a single Member State and traffic on inland waterway.
The proposed Regulation removes the possibility for Member States under the Athens Convention 2002 of fixing limits of liability higher than those provided for in the Convention.
The proposed Regulation removes the possibility for Member States under the Athens Convention 2002 of fixing limits of liability higher than those provided for in the Convention.
The Commission invokes as a justification the aim of having total uniformity within the EU.
The Commission invokes as a justification the aim of having total uniformity within the EU.
For damage or loss of mobility equipment/medical equipment belonging to a passenger with reduced mobility, the compensation will be, at the maximum, equivalent to the replacement value of the equipment.
For damage or loss of mobility equipment/medical equipment belonging to a passenger with reduced mobility, the compensation will be, at the maximum, equivalent to the replacement value of the equipment.
This provision is in line with the Proposal on rail's passenger's rights as it stands now in codecision.
This provision is in line with the Proposal on rail's passenger's rights as it stands now in codecision.
An advance payment is provided for in line with the scheme foreseen for air and rail sectors.
An advance payment is provided for in line with the scheme foreseen for air and rail sectors.
Finally, a pre-journey information provision is foreseen, it concerns in particular information on the limits of compensation for death, personal injury or loss and damage of luggage, the right of direct action against the insurer or the person providing financial security and on the entitlement to an advance payment.
Finally, a pre-journey information provision is foreseen, it concerns in particular information on the limits of compensation for death, personal injury or loss and damage of luggage, the right of direct action against the insurer or the person providing financial security and on the entitlement to an advance payment.
No particular mean of information is provided for in the Proposal (contrary to air transport - see Regulation on the Blacklist of air carriers and the identity of performing carrier).
No particular mean of information is provided for in the Proposal (contrary to air transport - see Regulation on the Blacklist of air carriers and the identity of performing carrier).
Position of the Rapporteur
Position of the Rapporteur
· Extension of the scope of application to domestic traffic (cabotage) and inland waterway transport .
· Extension of the scope of application to domestic traffic (cabotage) and inland waterway transport .
It has been mentioned that the implementation of this Proposal to cabotage transport and to inland waterways would create an unnecessary burden for the operators in this sector.
It has been mentioned that the implementation of this Proposal to cabotage transport and to inland waterways would create an unnecessary burden for the operators in this sector.
But no precise elements have been yet put on the table showing the inadequacy of the extension of the scheme for those markets, particularly concerning the liability ceiling.
But no precise elements have been yet put on the table showing the inadequacy of the extension of the scheme for those markets, particularly concerning the liability ceiling.