Subject: AW: Athens Correspondence Group (IMO Legal Committee): Letter to P&I and draft paper for LEG 92
From: "Stabinger Fritz"
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2006 14:43:10 +0200
To: Erik RÃ¸sÃ¦g
CC: "Tony Nunn"
Dear Erik –
thank you very much for your yesterday’s e-mail with attachments.
I shall limit IUMI’s comments to the draft paper ‘Provision of Financial Security’.
IUMI realizes that the caption of the paper says ‘submitted by
IUMI would of course not dare to comment on a Norwegian paper in this way,
but in the executive summary you do refer to the work of the correspondence
group which is of course lead by
of the paper report the consensus of the correspondence group which is,
I am sorry to say, not a fact.
what has been available to the correspondence group and to other interested
parties were the oral comments of a representative of the broker Marsh.
And oral comments coming from any party but probably even more so when coming
from a commercial broker, can hardly be called ‘evidence’.
‘Evidence’ to IUMI’s mind is a piece of paper containing a sample insurance
slip. This sample does not need to contain prices (premiums) but details of
the cover granted and exclusions plus an indication as to who (security) would
be prepared to lead the cover and with what percentage.
IUMI therefore would propose to re-phrase the 2nd phrase of this paragraph
as follows: There have been some comments to the correspondence group
and other interested parties that insurance solutions....may be offered by
The last part of para 5 beginning with ..., there is more... is highly dangerous
because it refers to a historic assumption we know nothing about – and again:
IUMI has a different understanding as to what is evidence.
IUMI, therefore, would propose to scratch all after the comma (..., there is...).
the details contained in an insurance slip are not commercially sensitive, in
particular when we do not insist on knowing pricing issues.
The fact that Marsh claims to be able to provide insurance security has been
heard by probably the whole legal committee and is, therefore, hardly sensitive
IUMI, therefore, proposes to re-phrase the sentence beginning with ‘However’
as follows: However, there has been no tradition in the legal committee to
require the industry to reveal commercial details.
(IUMI also proposes not to refer to the industry as ‘actors’ – some might
see that as offensive.)
you probably aim at US$ 500 million and not US$ 500.000.
The article referring to the Marsh scheme sounds vague and unconvincing
in particular when we have no insurance slip available to substantiate what
is said in the part ‘- The proposal...’.
Costs: IUMI proposes not to sound specific. And ‘probably be less than
US$ 0.5 per passenger per day/voyage’ is, again, too vague and, therefore,
unhelpful: after all if you are told that you ‘probably will not be hit by a car
when going home today’ you cannot do too much with that kind of
Focal point: also here, IUMI proposes to be a bit less definite.
Instead of saying ‘There is no reason whatsoever...’ it sounds better to
say ‘There are indications that an acceptable fronting company can be
Sustainability: again we are on thin ice here. We could equally say that
‘There is no confirmation, at this moment in time, that the proposed
insurance arrangements can be maintained over a longer period of time’.
Remember that most policies are renewed annually and whether the legal
committee really is flexible enough to alter its guidelines (remember,
you say that it meets again in autumn of 2007) in a timely manner is, to
our mind, questionable at least.
C.F. Meyer-Strasse 14
phone: +41 44 208 28 70
[mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] Im Auftrag von Erik Røsæg
Gesendet: Montag, 3. Juli 2006 13:42
An: Athen-korrgr; Lloyd Watkins
Betreff: Athens Correspondence Group (IMO Legal Committee): Letter to P&I and draft paper for LEG 92
Enclosed is a letter from me in my capacity as a Norwegian delegate to Lloyd Watkins, and also a first draft of a paper for LEG 92. Please note that the deadline for bulky documents is already 11 August. I shall be happy to take into consideration comments received well in advance of that time. It will also be possible to report on an eventual continued exchange in the Correspondence Group in a short paper after that time.
Professor Erik Røsæg (Rosaeg)
Scandinavian Institute of Maritime Law
POB 6706 St. Olavs plass
Tel: (+47) 22 85 97 52
Fax: (+47) 97 38 49 98