Port State Control
Encyclopedia
Port State Control is the inspection of foreign ships in other national ports by PSC officers (inspectors) for the purpose of verifying that the competency of the master and officers on board, the condition of a ship and its equipment comply with the requirements of international conventions (e.g. SOLAS
, MARPOL, STCW
, etc.) and that the vessel is manned and operated in compliance with applicable international law.
. After the Amoco Cadiz
sank that year, it was decided to also audit on safety and pollution. To this end, in 1982 the Paris Memorandum of Understanding (Paris MoU) was agreed upon, establishing Port State Control, nowadays 26 European countries and Canada. In practice, this was a reaction on the failure of the flag states - especially flags of convenience that have delegated their task to classification societies
- to comply with their inspection duties.
Following on the foundation built by the Paris MOU, several other regional MOUs have been signed, including the Tokyo MOU (Pacific Ocean), Acuerdo Latino or Acuerdo de Viña del Mar (South and Central America), the Caribbean MOU, the Mediterranean MOU, the Indian Ocean MOU, the Abuja MOU (West and Central Atlantic Africa), the Black Sea MOU, and the Riyadh MOU (Persian Gulf).
The United States Coast Guard
verifies that all foreign vessels operating in United States
waters are in substantial compliance with international conventions, as well as all applicable U.S. laws, regulations and treaties. The U.S. is not a member of any Port State Control MOU.
Courses of action a PSCO may impose on a ship with deficiencies (in order of ascending gravity):
1. Deficiencies can be rectified within 14 days for minor infractions
2. Under specific conditions, deficiencies can be rectified when the ship arrives at the next port
3. Deficiencies must be rectified before the ship can depart the port;
4. Detention of the ship
The current Member States of the Viña del Mar Agreement region are, in alphabetical order: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Chile, Cuba, Ecuador, Honduras, Mexico, Panama, Peru, Uruguay and Venezuela. Total member state has 13 countries.
Member state are as followed, Bulgaria, Georgia, Romania, Russian Federation, Turkey and Ukraine.
Member state are as followed: Antigua & Barbuda, Barbados, Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Jamaica, the Netherlands Antilles, Suriname and Trinidad and Tobago.
Indian Ocean MOU has nineteen countries' member: Australia, Bangladesh, Djibouti, Eritrea, France(La Reunion Island), India, Iran, Kenya, Maldives, Mauritius, Mozambique, Myanmar, Oman, Seychelles, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Tanzania, Yemen. Total member state has 19 countries.
member states are Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Tunisia and Turkey.
Vessels arriving in Paris MOU ports, that are due for expanded survey, they have to give a 72 hours pre arrival notification.
All vessels, not only the ones due for expanded survey, must give a 24 hours pre arrival notification. Details of the reporting requirements can be found in Paris MOU http://parismou.org/Inspection_efforts/Inspections/Frequently_Asked_Questions/Reporting_obligation/ web site or in other maritime sites.
The current Member States of the Paris MOU region are, in alphabetical order:
Belgium | Bulgaria | Canada | Croatia | Cyprus | Denmark | Estonia | Finland | France | Germany | Greece | Iceland | Ireland | Italy | Latvia | Lithuania | Malta | Netherlands | Norway | Poland | Portugal | Romania | Russian Federation | Slovenia | Spain | Sweden | United Kingdom. Total member state has 27 countries.
six member states are Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and UAEv.
Tokyo Mou has eighteen countries's member: Australia, Canada, Chile, China, Fiji, Hong Kong(China), Indonesia, Japan, Republic of Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, The Philippines, The Russian Federation, Singapore, Thailand, Vanuatu and Vietnam. Total member state has 18 countries.
As a result of detention the contract is discharged, and it may or may not be discharged by frustration.
A voyage contract can be discharged by frustration if the ship is beyond the control of the party involved in the contract.
According to Texas Company v. Hogarth Shipping Corp, a voyage charter is carrying out in 1915 while the British government take control of the vessel while the vessel is in British waters. This requisition resulted in another vessel being hired to perform the contract. The court held that the original contract is being frustrated as the original vessel is beyond the control of the party involved.
The case demonstrated the contract can be discharged by frustration while the control of the subject vessel is under control of a third party which has no relation with the contracted parties.
The contract can be discharged by frustration if the detention lasts long enough for the frustration doctrine to be invoked.
In Jackson v Union Marine Insurance Co, the contract is held frustrated. When the vessel went aground and require a time of 8 months to repair the ship, the delay is too long, the cargo can be shipped by another charter in a much shorter time. The length of the delay is long enough to provoked the frustration doctrine.
The main criteria for detention is that the ship is deemed unsafe to proceed to sea and that the deficiencies on a ship are considered serious by the inspector. These deficiencies must be rectified before the ship may sail again. In the annual report of Paris MOU , it stated that the major deficiencies are:
1. Certification of crew
2. Safety
3. Maritime Security
4. Marine Pollution and Environment
5. Working and Living Condition
6. Operational
7. Management
These deficiencies are the most common concern of a PSCO. When these deficiencies are clearly hazardous to safety, health, or the environment, the PSCO would require the hazard to be rectified before the ship can sail or detain the vessel or even issue a formal prohibition of the ship to operate.
As these deficiencies are self-induced by the ship operator or the ship owner, detention under PSC for the reasons listed above is not able to reach a frustration to discharge the contract on the vessel.
The PSC require a ship being detained to remedy the deficiencies which caused the detention. If the deficiencies cannot be remedied in the port of inspection, the port state would allow the ship to proceed to another port under special condition. The ship become free of detention only when all the fee induced by the inspection and detention is paid by the ship-owner.
Rationally, both the port state and the ship-owner do not want the ship to be detained for a long time. For the port state, the hazard of the ship might affect the condition of the port, and the ship-owner understand the vessel can only make money when it is sailing. Neither party would have the intention to keep the vessel being detained for an extremely long period of time. Therefore, the time of detention os normally not long enough to provoke the detention doctrine to discharge a contract.
The vessel is beyond the control of the parties in the contract
The time delayed is long enough to provoke the frustration doctrine
Under PSC, detention is mostly caused by self-induced deficiencies which is neither unforeseeable and unexpected, and the time for detention is not likely being long enough to provoke the frustration doctrine.
Therefore, detention a ship by PSC cannot discharge a voyage contract by frustration.
International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea
The International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea is an international maritime safety treaty. The SOLAS Convention in its successive forms is generally regarded as the most important of all international treaties concerning the safety of merchant ships.- History :The first version of the...
, MARPOL, STCW
STCW
The International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers , 1978 sets qualification standards for masters, officers and watch personnel on seagoing merchant ships. STCW was adopted in 1978 by conference at the International Maritime Organization in...
, etc.) and that the vessel is manned and operated in compliance with applicable international law.
History
In 1978, a number of European countries agreed in The Hague on memorandum that agreed to audit whether the labour conditions on board vessels were according the rules of the ILOInternational Labour Organization
The International Labour Organization is a specialized agency of the United Nations that deals with labour issues pertaining to international labour standards. Its headquarters are in Geneva, Switzerland. Its secretariat — the people who are employed by it throughout the world — is known as the...
. After the Amoco Cadiz
Amoco Cadiz
Amoco Cadiz was a very large crude carrier , owned by Amoco, that ran aground on Portsall Rocks, from the coast of Brittany, France, on 16 March 1978, and ultimately split in three and sank, all together resulting in the largest oil spill of its kind in history to that date.-Oil spill:Amoco Cadiz...
sank that year, it was decided to also audit on safety and pollution. To this end, in 1982 the Paris Memorandum of Understanding (Paris MoU) was agreed upon, establishing Port State Control, nowadays 26 European countries and Canada. In practice, this was a reaction on the failure of the flag states - especially flags of convenience that have delegated their task to classification societies
Classification society
A classification society is a non-governmental organization that establishes and maintains technical standards for the construction and operation of ships and offshore structures...
- to comply with their inspection duties.
Following on the foundation built by the Paris MOU, several other regional MOUs have been signed, including the Tokyo MOU (Pacific Ocean), Acuerdo Latino or Acuerdo de Viña del Mar (South and Central America), the Caribbean MOU, the Mediterranean MOU, the Indian Ocean MOU, the Abuja MOU (West and Central Atlantic Africa), the Black Sea MOU, and the Riyadh MOU (Persian Gulf).
The United States Coast Guard
United States Coast Guard
The United States Coast Guard is a branch of the United States Armed Forces and one of the seven U.S. uniformed services. The Coast Guard is a maritime, military, multi-mission service unique among the military branches for having a maritime law enforcement mission and a federal regulatory agency...
verifies that all foreign vessels operating in United States
United States
The United States of America is a federal constitutional republic comprising fifty states and a federal district...
waters are in substantial compliance with international conventions, as well as all applicable U.S. laws, regulations and treaties. The U.S. is not a member of any Port State Control MOU.
Detention of ship under Port State Control
Under Port State Control (PSC), inspection of ships in port would be taken by Port State Control Officer (PSCO). Annual report of Paris MoU reported a total of 74,713 deficiencies were recorded during port state control inspections in 2007. These deficiencies resulted in 1,250 detentions in the same year. Detention of the ship is the last course of action that a PSCO would take upon finding deficiencies aboard the vessel.Courses of action a PSCO may impose on a ship with deficiencies (in order of ascending gravity):
1. Deficiencies can be rectified within 14 days for minor infractions
2. Under specific conditions, deficiencies can be rectified when the ship arrives at the next port
3. Deficiencies must be rectified before the ship can depart the port;
4. Detention of the ship
Acuerdo de Viña del Mar Agreement (The Latin American Agreement on Port State Control of Vessels)
The MoU is mainly for Latine American Regio, namely as "The Latin American Agreement on Port State Control of Vessels" .- Members
The current Member States of the Viña del Mar Agreement region are, in alphabetical order: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Chile, Cuba, Ecuador, Honduras, Mexico, Panama, Peru, Uruguay and Venezuela. Total member state has 13 countries.
Abuja MOU (West and Central Africa MoU)
Abuja MOU is namely as "WEST AND CENTRAL AFRICA MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ON PORT STATE CONTROL". The member state includes Angola, Benin, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Congo, Cote d’ Ivoire, Gabon, Ghana, Guinea, Equatorial Guinea, Liberia, Mauritania, Namibia, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Africa, São Tomé and Príncipe, Democratic Republic of Congo, Guinea Bissau, The Gambia, and Togo.Black Sea MOU
The full name of this MoU is the "Black Sea Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control "- Members
Member state are as followed, Bulgaria, Georgia, Romania, Russian Federation, Turkey and Ukraine.
Caribbeaan MOU
The MoU is mainly for the Caribbean Region and named as "Caribbean Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control".- Members
Member state are as followed: Antigua & Barbuda, Barbados, Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Jamaica, the Netherlands Antilles, Suriname and Trinidad and Tobago.
Indian Ocean MOU
- Members
Indian Ocean MOU has nineteen countries' member: Australia, Bangladesh, Djibouti, Eritrea, France(La Reunion Island), India, Iran, Kenya, Maldives, Mauritius, Mozambique, Myanmar, Oman, Seychelles, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Tanzania, Yemen. Total member state has 19 countries.
Mediterranean MOU
The full name of this MoU is "Mediterranean MOU on PSC".- Members
member states are Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Tunisia and Turkey.
Paris MOU NIR
Paris MOU New Inspection Regime http://www.parismou.org/ParisMOU/New+Inspection+Regime/default.aspx is the new point system that the port state control authorities will use to evaluate vessels risk profile and their management companies performance. The new evaluation system which will be effective from 1 January 2011. Vessels are categorized in to three risk profiles. Low, Medium and High risk profile. Depending on the vessels risk profile the frequency of inspections by the port state control is determined. Free calculators are available in the web to help managers to evaluate their companies and vessels performance.- Pre arrival reporting obligations
Vessels arriving in Paris MOU ports, that are due for expanded survey, they have to give a 72 hours pre arrival notification.
All vessels, not only the ones due for expanded survey, must give a 24 hours pre arrival notification. Details of the reporting requirements can be found in Paris MOU http://parismou.org/Inspection_efforts/Inspections/Frequently_Asked_Questions/Reporting_obligation/ web site or in other maritime sites.
- Members
The current Member States of the Paris MOU region are, in alphabetical order:
Belgium | Bulgaria | Canada | Croatia | Cyprus | Denmark | Estonia | Finland | France | Germany | Greece | Iceland | Ireland | Italy | Latvia | Lithuania | Malta | Netherlands | Norway | Poland | Portugal | Romania | Russian Federation | Slovenia | Spain | Sweden | United Kingdom. Total member state has 27 countries.
Riyadh MoU (Gulf Region)
- Members
six member states are Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and UAEv.
Tokyo MOU (Asia-Pacific MoU)
This MoU is maninly for the Asia-Pacific region.- Members
Tokyo Mou has eighteen countries's member: Australia, Canada, Chile, China, Fiji, Hong Kong(China), Indonesia, Japan, Republic of Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, The Philippines, The Russian Federation, Singapore, Thailand, Vanuatu and Vietnam. Total member state has 18 countries.
Contract being discharged under detention
Ships taking visit to port are usually under a certain kind of contract, chartered or responsible for carrying goods as a carrier. Detention means the ship and the cargo would not be able to perform the contract according to what is agreed. Ships under detention cannot continue the voyage and arrive at the destination port as stated in the contract in the specific time assigned in the contract.As a result of detention the contract is discharged, and it may or may not be discharged by frustration.
Contract discharged by frustration
A contract discharged by frustration is well defined in Taylor v Caldwell, where the contract between Taylor and Caldwell is held frustrated. It is because the concert hall which is hired by Taylor from Caldwell is destructed without fault of either party and the contract is therefore discharged by frustration.- Discharged by frustration for being out of control
A voyage contract can be discharged by frustration if the ship is beyond the control of the party involved in the contract.
According to Texas Company v. Hogarth Shipping Corp, a voyage charter is carrying out in 1915 while the British government take control of the vessel while the vessel is in British waters. This requisition resulted in another vessel being hired to perform the contract. The court held that the original contract is being frustrated as the original vessel is beyond the control of the party involved.
The case demonstrated the contract can be discharged by frustration while the control of the subject vessel is under control of a third party which has no relation with the contracted parties.
- Discharged by frustration for extremely long time delay
The contract can be discharged by frustration if the detention lasts long enough for the frustration doctrine to be invoked.
In Jackson v Union Marine Insurance Co, the contract is held frustrated. When the vessel went aground and require a time of 8 months to repair the ship, the delay is too long, the cargo can be shipped by another charter in a much shorter time. The length of the delay is long enough to provoked the frustration doctrine.
Self-induced detention cannot discharge the contract through frustration
The contract cannot be discharged by frustration if it is caused by self-induced false.- Criteria for detaining a ship by PSCO
The main criteria for detention is that the ship is deemed unsafe to proceed to sea and that the deficiencies on a ship are considered serious by the inspector. These deficiencies must be rectified before the ship may sail again. In the annual report of Paris MOU , it stated that the major deficiencies are:
1. Certification of crew
2. Safety
3. Maritime Security
4. Marine Pollution and Environment
5. Working and Living Condition
6. Operational
7. Management
These deficiencies are the most common concern of a PSCO. When these deficiencies are clearly hazardous to safety, health, or the environment, the PSCO would require the hazard to be rectified before the ship can sail or detain the vessel or even issue a formal prohibition of the ship to operate.
As these deficiencies are self-induced by the ship operator or the ship owner, detention under PSC for the reasons listed above is not able to reach a frustration to discharge the contract on the vessel.
Short period of detention cannot discharge the contract through frustration
The contract cannot be discharged by frustration if the time under detention is not long enough to provoked the frustration doctrine.- PSC requirement upon detaining a ship
The PSC require a ship being detained to remedy the deficiencies which caused the detention. If the deficiencies cannot be remedied in the port of inspection, the port state would allow the ship to proceed to another port under special condition. The ship become free of detention only when all the fee induced by the inspection and detention is paid by the ship-owner.
- No party want a long detention
Rationally, both the port state and the ship-owner do not want the ship to be detained for a long time. For the port state, the hazard of the ship might affect the condition of the port, and the ship-owner understand the vessel can only make money when it is sailing. Neither party would have the intention to keep the vessel being detained for an extremely long period of time. Therefore, the time of detention os normally not long enough to provoke the detention doctrine to discharge a contract.
Discharge of contract under detention in PSC usually do not frustrate the voyage contract
In conclusion, a voyage contract can be frustrated when:The vessel is beyond the control of the parties in the contract
The time delayed is long enough to provoke the frustration doctrine
Under PSC, detention is mostly caused by self-induced deficiencies which is neither unforeseeable and unexpected, and the time for detention is not likely being long enough to provoke the frustration doctrine.
Therefore, detention a ship by PSC cannot discharge a voyage contract by frustration.