53rd Maritime Day - An Introspection
•
1 recomendación•583 vistas
A presentation on the 53rd Maritime Day (05th April 2016). Presented at CMMI Chandigarh chapter's Maritime Day celebration held at Panchkula.
Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
La actualidad más candente
La actualidad más candente (18)
Destacado
Destacado (14)
Similar a 53rd Maritime Day - An Introspection
Similar a 53rd Maritime Day - An Introspection (20)
Último
Último (20)
53rd Maritime Day - An Introspection
- 1. 53rd Maritime Day – An Introspection Capt. A. S. Brar LLM Maritime Law (Merit), University of Southampton PGD Marine Insurance, World Maritime University, Malmo Panchkula, 05th of April 2016
- 2. RMS Empress of India • Keel laid in 1890 at Barrow, England • Built by Naval Construction & Armament Co (later absorbed into Vickers Armstrong) • 30 August 1890 – Launched by Lady Louise Egerton, sister of Lord Harrington • 5905 ton vessel, length 455.6 feet x beam 51.2 feet (~ 138.8 m x 15.6 m) • One of the first vessels in the Pacific to have twin propellers with reciprocating engines; average speed 16 knots “White-painted, clipper-bowed ship; two buff-coloured funnels with a band of black paint at the top; three lightweight schooner-type masts”
- 4. Our History • December 1914 – Maharaja of Gwalior purchased RMS Empress of India • 19 January 1915 – Renamed SS Loyalty • 27 March 1919 – Joint venture set up by Walchand Hirachand, Narottam Morarjee, Kilachand Devchand and Lallubhai Samaldas • March 1919 – SS Loyalty sold to The Scindia Steam Navigation Company Ltd. • 05 April 1919 – Sailed from Bombay for the UK • February 1923 – Sold, scrapping at Bombay
- 6. Recent Developments in Maritime Field To enumerate a few… • Sea Traffic Management (STM) • MAchine eXecutable Colregs for Marine Autonomous Systems (MAXCMAS) • Southampton Marine and Maritime Institute (SMMI) • Insurance Act 2015 • Bi-lateral collaboration & research in the maritime field
- 7. Sea Traffic Management Master Plan “The MONALISA2.0 project has delivered an exciting vision and a well-defined concept over how shipping can be turned in to a more efficient, safe and environmentally friendly transport mode through Sea Traffic Management (STM). Now we also have a well-defined route description how to get there.”
- 8. Sea Traffic Management • The next step for a safer, more efficient and environmentally friendly maritime sector • Over 50 partners, 13 countries, budget of €43 million • Private, public and academic sector involved • Started 2015 and running till the end of 2018 • Large-scale test beds in Nordic and Mediterranean Seas • Encompasses about 300 vessels, 10 ports, 5 shore based service centres • Will also use the European Maritime Simulator Network
- 9. Southampton Marine and Maritime Institute • “… generate knowledge and intelligence for businesses of all sizes, government at all scales and organisations of all kinds.” • “… create new technologies and innovations to stimulate economic growth …” • “…strategic partnerships with key organisations… based on longer term visions of collaboration to achieve specific goals” • A new £140m Boldrewood Campus at Southampton University
- 10. Southampton Marine and Maritime Institute • Partnership with Lloyds Register goes back over 40 years. Currently the largest university-business collaboration in the UK • Advanced Technology Partnership (ATP) with the Royal National Lifeboat Institution; range of projects that keep the two organisations fully engaged in research, development and innovation • Collaboration with the National Oceanography Centre, a government owned research organisation; relationship covers all aspects of marine science as well as key innovations such as autonomous systems. • As on 05th of April 2016, 10 PhD vacancies advertised in diverse fields
- 11. MAchine eXecutable Colregs for Marine Autonomous Systems (MAXCMAS) • A 26 months, £1.27m UK project with academic and industrial partners • Includes Rolls Royce, Atlas Electronik UK, Lloyd’s Register and Southampton Solent University • Project will develop collision avoidance algorithms for autonomous seagoing vessels • Aims to develop a more comprehensive capability and demonstrate satisfactory execution in real-world representative sea trials • Use of networked bridge simulators as a safe yet effective test environment in the first instance
- 12. Insurance Act 2015 • Entered in force in the United Kingdom on 12th of August 2016 • Result of a joint review by the Law Commission and Scottish Law Commission into insurance law • Seeks to create fairer balance between policyholder and insurer • Marine Insurance – all direct placements and all reinsurance contracts in the UK
- 13. Insurance Act 2015 • Introduced substantial changes to the laws governing disclosure in non-consumer insurance contracts; warranties and other contractual terms; and insurers’ remedies for fraudulent claims • Sets a default regime, with opt-out provisions • Allows insurers to contract out of important elements of the Act for non-consumers – as far as it is done in a ‘transparent’ manner
- 14. China Centre (Maritime) at Southampton Solent University • Launched at the International Maritime Organisation in Sept 2015 • use its academic excellence, knowledge of Chinese maritime business and strong links with both the Chinese and British maritime communities • to bring the two countries closer in maritime-related affairs, and beyond • promotes research and disseminates studies on the role of China as a major world maritime nation in the 21st Century • “Director … was one of 20 senior Chinese academics working in UK universities - including Cambridge, Oxford, Imperial and Cardiff – invited to meet the President at the Mandarin Oriental Hyde Park Hotel on Thursday 22 October”
- 15. Developments in the Indian Maritime Field Do we have… • research in Maritime Education? • research in Maritime Training? • research & investment in Maritime Technology? • research in Maritime Law? • reputed Maritime Journals? • R&D in (Civilian) Maritime Field?
- 16. Developments in the Indian Maritime Field Are we… • Generating knowledge and maritime intelligence? • Creating new technologies and innovations in the maritime sector? • Strategic partnerships based on longer term visions of collaboration?
- 17. Ask yourself… • Nationality of leading ship managers, operators • Nationality of good auditors • Nationality of good vetting inspectors • Surveyors of which nationality are employed with leading Classification Societies or Recognized Organisations • Surveyors of which nationality are employed with foreign Flag States • Lecturers of which nationality are readily employed by maritime colleges abroad
- 18. What will be our legacy? • What do we wish to leave for the next generation? • We must act to define how the future generations will remember us • We must define how Maritime Day will be celebrated in the future • Our choices today shape the Indian maritime future
- 19. Our Legacy – Just this or something more? Empress Of India / Loyalty 1890 5905 gross tons, length 455.7ft x beam 51.2ft,clipper bows, two funnels, three masts, twin screw, speed 16 knots, accommodation for 50-1st, 150-2nd and 400-3rd class passengers. Built by Naval Construction & Armament Co., Barrow, she was launched on 30th Aug.1890. Maiden voyage 8th Feb.1891 Liverpool - Suez - Hong Kong - Vancouver and then onto the Hong Kong - Shanghai - Nagasaki - Kobe - Yokohama - Vancouver service (Canadian Pacific). 17th Aug.1903 collided with and sank the Chinese cruiser HUANG TAI. 7th Dec.1914 purchased by the Maharajah of Gwalior and converted into a hospital ship for Indian troops. 19th Jan.1915 renamed LOYALTY. Mar.1919 sold to Scindia S.N. Co, Bombay. Feb.1923 sold for scrapping at Bombay. [Merchant Fleets, vol.3 by Duncan Haws]
- 20. Thank You
- 21. Bibliography • http://www.discoversouthampton.co.uk/living/news/2015/10/26/local-academic-meets-president- xi-jinping-during-his-visit-to-the-uk • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_maritime_history • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Empress_of_India_(1890) • https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=33719032 • http://pib.nic.in/feature/feyr2001/fmar2001/f260320011.html • http://stmvalidation.eu/ • http://www.theshipslist.com/ships/descriptions/ShipsE.shtml • http://www.solent.ac.uk/research/china-centre/china-centre.aspx • http://www.southampton.ac.uk/smmi/index.page
Notas del editor
- Empress of India passing through First Narrows, Vancouver 1891; Photograph dated: 29 April 1891
- RMS Empress of India - Used as hospital ship for Indian troops in the First World War.
- News snippet from the New York Times
- MONALISA 2.0 defined a need for validating STM in ports and on board ships supported by service centres on shore 300 “STM-Systems” will be installed on board ships, developed and installed by ECDIS-manufacturers free-of-charge, and start running live in 2017
- http://stmvalidation.eu/ http://stmvalidation.eu/documents/ http://stmvalidation.eu/available-300-free-systems-wanted-300-ships/
- http://www.southampton.ac.uk/smmi/index.page
- http://www.southampton.ac.uk/smmi/partners/index.page http://www.southampton.ac.uk/smmi/news/2015/12/18-applications-for-leverhulme-trust-projects-now-open.page 1. Engineering Analysis of 19th century British Merchant Ships and Shipbuilding 2. What are the social equity challenges for coastal flood adaptation and insurance in terms of engineering and legal issues facing private dwellings? 3. Micro-plastics in the environment and risks to human health. 4. Assessing the viability of Arctic hydrate exploitation. 5. Subsea Transmission: Economic and Environmental Limitations. 6. Hybrid propulsion for LNG bunker vessels. 7. New Off-Ship Support Service Concepts for Future Maritime Operations. 8. Mapping Potential Wreck Sites with Seafloor Data - Scientific, Social and Legal Considerations. 9. Spatio-temporal modelling of population and vulnerability to coastal hazards in East Asia. 10. Understanding and addressing maritime issues through fleet analysis.
- https://www.qub.ac.uk/research-centres/EPIC/News/Title,525545,en.html http://www.solent.ac.uk/research/maritime-technology-environment/current-projects/research-projects.aspx
- http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/4/contents http://www.willis.co.uk/documents/Industries/Willis%20Technical%20Insight%20-%20Insurance%20Act%202015.pdf http://www.out-law.com/en/topics/insurance/insurance-regulation/the-insurance-act-2015-practical-changes-for-insurers-to-consider/
- New disclosure duties in non-consumer insurance contracts Previously, insured parties were required to disclose every circumstance that they knew, or ought to have known, which would influence an insurer in fixing a premium or deciding whether to underwrite a risk. This required insured parties to predict, without much guidance, what factors a hypothetical prudent insurer would be influenced by. The same obligation extended to brokers acting on behalf of insured parties. Part 2 of the 2015 Act has created a new ‘duty of fair presentation’ aimed at encouraging active, rather than passive, engagement by insurers as well as clarifying and specifying known or presumed to be known matters. When the Act comes into force, before entering into a contract of insurance, insured parties will be required to disclose either: every matter which they know, or ought to know, that would influence the judgement of an insurer in deciding whether to insure the risk and on what terms (very similar to the current position); or sufficient information to put an insurer on notice that it needs to make further enquiries about potentially material circumstances. Insured parties will be considered to have known, or ought to have known: matters that could be expected to be revealed by a reasonable search of information available to the insured party – for example, information held within an organisation or by a broker; anything known by a person responsible for their insurance – for example, a broker; insured organisations will also be deemed to have the knowledge of anyone who is a part of the organisation’s senior management, or who is responsible for their insurance. Insurers will be considered to have known, or ought to have known: matters known to individuals who participate on behalf of the insurer in deciding whether to take the risk and on what terms – for example, underwriting teams; knowledge held by the insurer and readily available to the person deciding whether to take the risk; matters known by an employee or agent of the insurer and which should reasonably have been passed on to the person deciding whether to take the risk. Brokers will no longer be subject to disclosure duties. Under the Act, disclosure must be made in a reasonably clear and accessible manner, material representations of fact must be ‘substantially correct’ and material representations of expectation or belief must be made in ‘good faith’. Individuals will be deemed to know matters which they suspected and which they would have known about had they not deliberately refrained from confirming or enquiring about it. Practical implications from these changes Insured parties should review their disclosure processes to ensure that those responsible for procuring insurance disclose all matters they will be presumed to know. For example: consider keeping internal records of the name and roles of individuals responsible for arranging insurance cover, as matters within their knowledge will need to be disclosed; senior management should be involved in any disclosures made; evaluate the steps taken to obtain information from internal and external sources and keep records to demonstrate that reasonable searches have been made. The Law Commissions stated that the new standards were designed in part to prevent ‘data dumping’, meaning the presentation of large volumes of material without distinction between the material and the trivial. Pre-disclosure analysis and filtering of relevant information will be needed to ensure that disclosure is made in a reasonably clear and accessible manner. Insurers will not be able to rely on a passive approach to disclosure if seeking to exercise remedies for non-disclosure. More active engagement will now be encouraged and, if not in place already, insurers should consider establishing systems and processes to identify when further enquiries need to be made before underwriting risks. Insurers should review what information is readily available to those who decide whether to accept risks and the terms on which to do so. For example: consider keeping internal records of the names and roles of individuals responsible for these decisions; establish appropriate processes and lines of communication to ensure that relevant information is shared widely enough with those making decisions to cover certain risks. Remedies for breach of duty of pre-contractual disclosure Previously, an insurer was able to refuse all claims under an insurance contract if the pre-contractual disclosure duty was breached, even if the breach was committed by the broker. The 2015 Act has now introduced a range of proportionate remedies, applicable depending on the scale of the breach and the state of mind of the insurer. These are: deliberate or reckless breach: the insurer will be able to avoid the contract and keep any premiums; breach is neither deliberate nor reckless and the insurer would not have entered into the contract: the insurer will be able to avoid the contract but must return any premiums; breach is neither deliberate nor reckless and the insurer would have entered into the contract on different terms, other than terms relating to premium: the insurer will be able to treat the contract as if those different terms apply – for example, any additional exclusions that would have been imposed; breach is neither deliberate nor reckless and the insurer would have entered into the contract for a higher premium: the insurer will be able to reduce the cover to which the insured is entitled on a proportionate basis. These remedies will only be available if the insurer would not have entered into the insurance contract had the breach not occurred, or would have done so on different terms. Practical implications from these changes To bring an action for relief for non-disclosure, insurers will need to be able to prove how they would have acted differently if the breach had not occurred. Disclosure of underwriting guides and other relevant documents may now be required, along with records of underwriting decisions made and factors considered in particular cases. Insurers will need to consider the extent to which they are willing to disclose commercially sensitive information contained within such records or documents. Changes to contractual terms and warranties: consumer and non-consumer contracts Previously, ‘basis of the contract’ clauses could convert all representations made in the course of a non-consumer insurance contract into contractual warranties. Breaching a warranty would completely discharge an insurer from liability for all risks covered by the policy from the time of the breach, even if the warranty had no bearing on the risk. Part 3 of the 2015 Act has now banned ‘basis of the contract’ clauses from non-consumer insurance contracts. Instead of discharging liability, a breach of warranty now results in the insurance cover being suspended for the duration of the breach and re-instated once the breach has been fixed. An insurer will no longer be able to rely on non-compliance with a warranty, or any other term relating to loss of a particular kind or at a particular location or time, if the non-compliance could not have increased the risk of loss that occurred in the circumstances that it occurred. For example, if a requirement in a policy to maintain window locks is not complied with by the insured party and loss is subsequently caused by flooding, then the insurer will no longer be able to rely on the insured party’s non-compliance to avoid liability as the maintenance of window locks could not have reduced the risk of flooding occurring. This will not apply in respect of terms that define the risk as a whole: for example, terms restricting cover to non-commercial use, rather than a term that relates to loss of a particular kind during such non-commercial use. Remedies for fraudulent claims by policyholders: consumer and non-consumer contracts Previously, in the event of fraud, an insured party would forfeit the whole claim and insurers could also avoid the whole contract. Part 4 of the 2015 Act now sets out a clear statement of insurers’ remedies in the event of fraudulent claims brought by policyholders. Insurers: will not be liable to pay the fraudulent claim; may recover any sums paid to the insured in respect of the fraudulent claim; and may, by notice, treat the policy as terminated with effect from the fraudulent act and retain all premiums paid. Previous valid claims are unaffected. The same rights apply in respect of fraudulent claims made by persons under group insurance policies, although only in respect of those persons who committed fraudulent acts and not the other innocent members of the group policy. Insurers will need to serve a notice on the fraudulent group member and the person who took out the policy on behalf of the group. Sums paid in respect of the claim may be recovered from the person who committed the fraudulent act, or the person who took out the policy on behalf of the group if they had not passed sums on to the fraudulent person. Duty of utmost good faith: consumer and non-consumer contracts Previously, either party could avoid the insurance contract if the other failed to act in accordance with ‘utmost good faith’. Significantly, Part 5 of the 2015 Act has now removed avoidance of contract as a remedy for breach of this duty, and abolished any parts of legislation prescribing this as a remedy. Insurance contracts will still be based on utmost good faith, and clauses and obligations will be interpreted in a way that favours compliance with this duty. Contracting out of the Insurance Act: consumer and non-consumer contracts Finally, it is important to note that Part 5 of the Act prevents an insurer from contracting out of its provisions with the effect of placing an insured party in a worse position than they would have been in under the provisions of the Act. Parties to non-consumer insurance contracts can agree less favourable terms than those in the Act, provided that the alternative provisions are clear and unambiguous and sufficient steps are taken to draw them to the intention of the insured party of its agent before the contract is concluded. Parties to both consumer and non-consumer contracts cannot contract out of the new prohibition on ‘basis of contract’ clauses.
- http://www.solent.ac.uk/research/china-centre/china-centre.aspx http://www.discoversouthampton.co.uk/living/news/2015/10/26/local-academic-meets-president-xi-jinping-during-his-visit-to-the-uk
- Our choices today is shape the future of shipping in India.