Despite all the difficulties surrounding the ratifications and accessions to the
Convention, it finally entered into force and gained more international acceptance
than its predecessor and attracted some 30 Contracting States, including the
European Union that joined the Convention along with its Member States. For
example, the UK is a Contracting State to the Athens Convention 2002 and
denounced the Athens Convention 1974. In contrast, the US
10 has joined neither
of the sea passenger conventions. In this manner, the majority of passengers’
contracts contain US general maritime law (Federal law) as the applicable law.
Even if the US law might be favourable in some categories of claims (death of
passengers),
11 it will not be that favourable in the area of psychological damage and
non-economic losses such as e.g. delays and cancellations.
1.3 Scope of Application and Salient Features of Athens
Convention 1974, as Amended by the Protocol of 2002
The general structure and salient features of the Athens Convention 2002 will be
discussed, coupled with the issue of limitation of liability pertinent to all transport
conventions. It must be noted that the Convention deals with civil liability of
carriers, limitation of liability and compensation to passengers for losses incurred
during the voyage, such as losses resulting from loss of life or personal injury or loss
of, or damage to, their property/luggage.
12 In contrast to the Athens Convention
1974 which is a fault-based liability regime, the Protocol 2002 provides for strict and
fault-based liability, two tiers of limitation amounts and compulsory insurance. The
Convention makes an important distinction between a shipping and non-shipping
incident that would entail different levels of liability and compensation.
As every international convention, the Athens Convention 2002 has its limitations and does not apply to any passenger carriage by sea. In particular, it does not
deal with liability arising out of a ruined holiday which is an area covered by relevant
domestic law or EU legislation on package travel. Also, according to Article 22 there
is a possibility for a State Party to exclude the application of the Convention in cases
where the carrier and the passenger are nationals of that State, and therefore there is
no foreign element.
The scope of application is found in Article 2 which states that the Convention
covers any international carriage if:
a) the ship is flying the flag of or is registered in a State Party to this Convention, or
b) the contract of carriage has been made in a State Party to this Convention, or
10 US Carnival Cruises is the biggest brand and owner of about 22 ships.
11 The law provides no compensation for the death of pensioners and children and based only on the
economic compensation which is completely in conflict with the Athens Convention.
12 Both instruments bear certain similarities but also distinctive features in terms of the liability
regime, insurance and compensation available to the passengers.
A Critical Analysis of Carriage of Passengers by Sea: Uniformity. . .
63
Convention, it finally entered into force and gained more international acceptance
than its predecessor and attracted some 30 Contracting States, including the
European Union that joined the Convention along with its Member States. For
example, the UK is a Contracting State to the Athens Convention 2002 and
denounced the Athens Convention 1974. In contrast, the US
10 has joined neither
of the sea passenger conventions. In this manner, the majority of passengers’
contracts contain US general maritime law (Federal law) as the applicable law.
Even if the US law might be favourable in some categories of claims (death of
passengers),
11 it will not be that favourable in the area of psychological damage and
non-economic losses such as e.g. delays and cancellations.
1.3 Scope of Application and Salient Features of Athens
Convention 1974, as Amended by the Protocol of 2002
The general structure and salient features of the Athens Convention 2002 will be
discussed, coupled with the issue of limitation of liability pertinent to all transport
conventions. It must be noted that the Convention deals with civil liability of
carriers, limitation of liability and compensation to passengers for losses incurred
during the voyage, such as losses resulting from loss of life or personal injury or loss
of, or damage to, their property/luggage.
12 In contrast to the Athens Convention
1974 which is a fault-based liability regime, the Protocol 2002 provides for strict and
fault-based liability, two tiers of limitation amounts and compulsory insurance. The
Convention makes an important distinction between a shipping and non-shipping
incident that would entail different levels of liability and compensation.
As every international convention, the Athens Convention 2002 has its limitations and does not apply to any passenger carriage by sea. In particular, it does not
deal with liability arising out of a ruined holiday which is an area covered by relevant
domestic law or EU legislation on package travel. Also, according to Article 22 there
is a possibility for a State Party to exclude the application of the Convention in cases
where the carrier and the passenger are nationals of that State, and therefore there is
no foreign element.
The scope of application is found in Article 2 which states that the Convention
covers any international carriage if:
a) the ship is flying the flag of or is registered in a State Party to this Convention, or
b) the contract of carriage has been made in a State Party to this Convention, or
10 US Carnival Cruises is the biggest brand and owner of about 22 ships.
11 The law provides no compensation for the death of pensioners and children and based only on the
economic compensation which is completely in conflict with the Athens Convention.
12 Both instruments bear certain similarities but also distinctive features in terms of the liability
regime, insurance and compensation available to the passengers.
A Critical Analysis of Carriage of Passengers by Sea: Uniformity. . .
63