nach oben

Erschienen in:

2020 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

A New Era, a New Risk! “A Study on the Impact of the Developments of New Technologies in the Shipping Industry and Marine Insurance Market”

verfasst von : Julia Constantino Chagas Lessa, Belma Bulut

Erschienen in: InsurTech: A Legal and Regulatory View

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

The shipping industry is currently living in full its digital era, which is characterised by the increase of technology used in all its sectors. Although this era is highly praised among ship industry stakeholders, as it is said to optimise services, reducing the number of incidents and consequently reducing costs, it is also consider a grey area since the risks associate to it are still relatively unknown and yet to be accessed. To an industry that relies heavily in insurance, such as shipping, the necessity to analyse these risks is eminent. This chapter attempts to tackle how these new developments brought by the shipping digital era can fit into the current marine insurance legal framework.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Vorheriges Kapitel Ethical Issues, Cybersecurity and Automated Vehicles

Nächstes Kapitel Probing Civil Liability Insurance for Unmanned/Autonomous Merchant Ships

P Tucker, ‘Major Cyber Attack Will Cause Significant Loss of Life by 2025, Experts Predict’ (2014) www.defenseone.com/threats/2014/10/cyber-attack-will-cause-significant-loss-life-2025-experts- predict/97688/ accessed 01/04/2018.

US Department of Transportation, MARAD www.marad.dot.gov/office-of-security/msci/alert/2018/ accessed 15/09/2018.

Cambridge Dictionary Online https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/cyberattack accessed 15/09/2018.

JE Cartwright, ‘Memorandum for Chiefs of the Military Servs., Commanders of the Combatant Commands, Dirs. of the Joint Staff Directories on Joint Terminology for Cyberspace Operations’ (2011) www.nsci-va.org/CyberReferenceLib/2010-11-joint%20Terminology%20for%20Cyberspace%20Operations.pdf accessed 19/09/2018.

HM Government, ‘UK National Cyber Security Strategy 2016-2021’ (2016) https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/567242/national_cyber_security_strategy_2016.pdf accessed 18/08/2018.

NATO, ‘Translation of Cyber- the Good, the Bad and the Bug-free’ www.nato.int/docu/review/2013/Cyber/timeline/DK/index.htm accessed 30/04/2018.

Allianz Global Corporate & Speciality, ‘Safety and Shipping Review 2017, An Annual Review of Trends and Developments in Shipping Losses and Safety’ (2017b) www.agcs.allianz.com/assets/PDFs/Reports/AGCS_Safety_Shipping_Review_2017.pdf accessed 08/09/2018.

BIMCO et al., ‘Guidelines on Cyber Security Onboard Ships, Version 2.0’ (2017).

The International Maritime Organization ‘Guidelines on Maritime Cyber Risk Management MSC-Fal.1/Circ.3’ (2017a); Boyes and Isbell (2017).

Ibid.

BIMCO et al. (2017) and Boyes and Isbell (2017).

KPMG, ‘Cyber Crime Survey Report, Insights and Perspectives’ (2017) https://assets.kpmg.com/content/dam/kpmg/in/pdf/2017/12/Cyber-Crime-Survey.pdf accessed 30/09/2018.

Chouhan (2015), p. 2.

BIMCO et al. (2017).

Ibid.

Cooper (2018); V Wee, ‘Malaysian Bunker Company Cheated of $1.1m in Email Payment Scam’ (2017) www.seatrade-maritime.com/news/asia/malaysian-bunker-company-cheated-of-1-1m-in-email-payment-scam.html accessed 20/09/2018.

Part XII, Section 5 of the UNCLOS; Art 211 of the UNCLOS.

For instance, Section 742 of The Merchant Shipping Act 1894 stated that:

Vessel’ includes any ship or boat, or any other description of vessel used in navigation:

‘Ship’ includes every description of vessel used in navigation not propelled by oars…

The words ‘not propelled by oars’ of the 1894 Act were removed by the Merchant Shipping Act 1994 and these amendments were kept by the Merchant Shipping Act 1995 Section 313. Accordingly, under English law the term “vessel” not only differs from the term “ship” as it is broader. This was confirmed in Steedman v Scofield [1992] 2 Lloyd’s Rep163, where Sheen J stated that “a vessel is usually a hollow receptacle for carrying goods or people. In common parlance ‘vessel’ is a word used to refer to craft larger than rowing boats and it includes every description of a watercraft used or capable of being used as a means of transportation on water”.

Lazaratos (1969), p. 57.

Art 2(4) of International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL) 73/78.

Art 1(1) of International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage (BUNKER) 2001.

Art 1(b) of International Convention on Salvage 1989.

Annex I, Reg I/3(a)(iii) of International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 1974.

Art 1(d) of International Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules of Law Relating to Bills of Lading (Hague Rules), 1924.

Art 2 of United Nations Convention on Conditions for Registration of Ships, 1986.

Art 1(f) of Convention on the International Maritime Satellite Organization (IMSO), 1976.

Art 1(a) of Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation (SUA), 1988.

Gauci (2016), p. 479.

Ibid 480.

For instance, the general definition set up by the USA Congress is “every description of watercraft or other artificial contrivance used, or capable of being used, as a means of transportation by water”.(1 U.S.C. § 3). In Steedman v Scofield, [1992] 2 Lloyds Rep 163. At the time, Mr. Justice Sheen held that the Jet Ski was not a ship for the 2-year time limit applicable to collisions based on the fact that the Jet Ski was not ‘used in navigation’. See Arvanitis and Constantino Chagas Lessa (2014), p. 133. Perhaps, more importantly, in Polpen Shipping Co Ltd v Commercial Union Assurance Co Ltd [1943] 1 All ER 162, 165, a case concerning a collision, Atkison J stated: I do not want to attempt a definition, but I think a ship or vessel does involve two ideas. If I had to define them, I should say a vessel was any hollow structure intended to be used in navigation, that is, intended to do its real work upon the sea or other waters, and which is capable of free and ordered movement from a place to another’.

Gahlen (2014), p. 252; Bork et al. (2008), pp. 298, 307, 328.

It is important to note that some national jurisdictions, such as England and Wales, do not consider the ability to covey persons or cargo a prerequisite for a craft to be considered a ship. In the case of R v Goodwin [2005] EWCA Crim 3184, [27]; [2006] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 432, 438, in which Lord Phillips CJ opined that, for a “vessel to be ‘used in navigation’ under the Merchant Shipping Acts, it is not a necessary requirement that it should be used in transporting persons or property by water to an intended destination.”

Veal and Tsimplis (2017), pp. 303, 308.

V Lowe, ‘Report on the Interpretation of the Term ‘ship’ in the 1992 Civil Liability Convention’ in Consideration of the Definition of ‘Ship’, International Oil Pollution Compensation Funds (IOPC/OCT11/4/4, 2011) documentservices.iopcfunds.org/meeting-documents/download/docs/3535/lang/en/ accessed 18/08/2018; Van Hooydonk (2014), pp. 403, 408.

The International Maritime Organization Maritime Safety Committee (MSC), 99th session 16–25 May 2018; The International Maritime Organization Briefing, ‘IMO Takes First Steps to Address Autonomous Ships’ (2018a) www.imo.org/en/mediacentre/pressbriefings/pages/08-msc-99-mass-scoping.aspx accessed 10/06/2018.

Kongsberg, ‘Autonomous Ship Project, Key Facts about YARA Birkeland’ www.km.kongsberg.com accessed 15/08/2018; The Maritime Executive, ‘Shipbuilder Chosen for Yara Birkeland’ www.maritime-executive.com/article/shipbuilder-chosen-for-yara-birkeland 15/08/2018.

Veal and Tsimplis (2017), p. 311.

Gauci (2016), p. 482.

EWCA Crim 3184.

Ibid.

Veal and Tsimplis (2017), p. 311.

Ibid 312.

[1992] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 163.

R v Goodwin [2006] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 432, 437.

Polpen Shipping v Commercial Union (1943) 74 L1. L. Rep 157.

(1926) 26 Ll L Rep 201.

Ibid 202.

Gauci (2016), p. 489.

Falkanger et al. (2011), p. 44.

Blaskovic-Schnell (2016), p. 167.

[1992] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 163.

Danish Maritime Authority, ‘Analysis of Regulatory Barriers to the Use of Autonomous Ships Final Report’ Ramboll 2017, 38.

(1839) 5 M & W 405.

(1856) 6 E & B 937.

The Xantho (1887) 12 App Cas 503, 509. See also, Katsivela (2014), pp. 343, 435 et seq.

P Samuel & Co Ltd v Dumas [1924] AC 431, 461–462.

[2011] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 187.

Please refer to Sect. 2 of the chapter, Meaning and Scope of the Term “Cyber Attack”.

[1905] 1 KB 697.

Please refer to Sect. 2 of the chapter, Meaning and Scope of the Term “Cyber Attack”.

McFadden v Blue Star Line [1905] 1 KB 697; The Madeleine [1967] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 224.

Soyer (2017).

(1807) 1 Camp 1; 170 ER 855.

[1962] 2 WLR 474.

Ibid 481.

President of India v West Coast Steamship Co [1963] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 278, 281 per District Judge Kilkenny.

S. 39(1) of Marine Insurance Act 1906.

Van Hooydonk (2014).

Davey (2013), pp. 118, 119.

Danish Maritime Authority (2017), p. 5.

Van Hooydonk (2014), p. 412.

British Maritime Law Association (BMLA), ‘Response to CMI Questionnaire on Unmanned Ships’ EME_ACTIVE-568475036.1 (2018) www.bmla.org.uk/documents/2018/BMLA-Response-to-CMI-Questionnaire-on-Unmanned-Ships.pdf accessed 08/08/2018.

For a more detailed discussion about how such regulations could be amended please see; Bernauw (2017), p. 359; Daum and Stellplug (2017), p. 363.

Mellilo (2016).

E Jokioinen et al., ‘Advanced Autonomous Waterborne Applications (AAWA) Position Paper, Remote and Autonomous Ships: The Next Steps (Rolls Royce)’ (2016) www.rolls-royce.com/~/media/Files/R/Rolls-Royce/documents/customers/marine/ship-intel/aawa-whitepaper-210616.pdf accessed 15/08/2018.

The first autonomous container line vessel is expected to be launched in 2020 and gradually move from manned operation to fully autonomous operation by 2022, leaving a mere more or less three years since the drafting of this chapter for the maritime legislative framework to adapt to this new reality.

[2001] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 389.

[2002] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 719. In this case, it was stated that incompetence might result from: (a) an inherent lack of ability; (b) a lack of adequate training or instruction; (c) a lack of knowledge about a particular vessel and/or its systems; (d) disinclination to perform the job properly; (e) physical or mental incapacity.

As happened in The Star Sea [2001] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 389 in which the ship was carrying safety certificates but in fact they were not properly applied therefore the ship was considered as unseaworthy.

HC Burmeister et al., ‘Can unmanned ships improve navigational safety?’ (2014) Transport Research Arena http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.846.5385&rep=rep1&type=pdf accessed 09/10/2018.

Allianz Global Corporate & Speciality, ‘Ready to launch: Autonomous ships - Smart Sails (2017a) www.allianz.com/en_GB/press/news/business/insurance/170824-autonomous-shipping-smart-sails.html accessed 09/09/2018.

Macfarlane (2017).

IMO Guidelines (2017) include a non-exhaustive list of vulnerabilities created by such risks, including bridge systems, access control systems and communication systems.

Ibid, 1.

For a more comprehensive analysis of the circumstances effecting autonomous shipping see; Danish Maritime Authority (2017), p. 3.

G Yeomans, ‘Autonomous Vehicles- Handing over Control: Opportunities and Risks for Insurance’ (2014) www.lloyds.com/news-and-risk-insight/risk-reports/library/technology/autonomous-vehicles accessed 09/10/2018.

P Marllow, ‘Cyber Liability in the Marine Industry Report’ (2015) https://www.ajg.com/media/1697987/cyber-liability-for-the-marine-industry.pdf accessed 09/10/2018.

Lloyd’ s Register, ‘Cyber Enabled Ships – Ship Right Procedure Assignment For Cyber Descriptive Notes for Autonomous & Remote Access Ships’ (2017) Lloyd’s Register Guidance Document, Version 2.0.

BIMCO et al., ‘Guidelines on Cyber Security Onboard Ships, Version 1.1’ (2016).

BIMCO et al. (2017).

DNV-GL, ‘Recommended Practice – Cyber Security Resilience Management for Ships and Mobile Offshore Units in Operation’ DMVGL-RP-0496, 2016.

IMO Guidelines (2017).

The International Maritime Organization Maritime, ‘Safety Committee Maritime Cyber Risk Management in Safety Management Systems Resolution MSC. 428(98)’ (2017b).

Yara, ‘YARA Selects Norwegian Shipbuilder VARD For Zero-Emission Vessel Yara Birkeland’ www.yara.com/corporate-releases/yara-selects-norwegian-shipbuilder-vard-for-zero-emission-vessel-yara-birkeland/ accessed 15/08/2018.

Macfarlane (2017).

Donaldson (1999), p. 526.

Anderson (2015).

Boyes and Isbell (2017).

Ibid.

100

GARD, ‘Cyber Security- Managing the Threat’ (2017) www.gard.no/Content/21112216/CyberSecurity accessed 14/05/2018.

101

Ibid.

102

Soyer (2017), p. 147.

103

Gault et al. (2016) ch.4, para 5.106.

104

Veal and Tsimplis (2017), p. 325.

105

Reynardson et al. (2017).

106

Hu et al. (2017), p. 13622.

107

[1991] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 591. In this case, Sheen J found, in circumstances where the radars of the vessel were rendered inoperative because of a thick fog that the vessel “could have sought advice from the fog watch pilot on duty in the Harwich Habour Operations Room…this would have been better than without assistance and proceeding down channel on the wrong side”.

108

Veal and Tsimplis (2017), p. 328.

109

Hu et al. (2017).

110

Danish Maritime Authority (2017), p. 47.

111

In Doak v Weekes & Commercial Union Assurance Co plc [1986] 82 FLR 334 Ryan J held that leaving port without people on board with the correct certificates was contrary to regulation and the adventure was thus carried out in an unlawful manner. Following the same lines, in Switzerland Insurance Australia Ltd v Mowie Fisheries Pty Ltd [1997] FCA 231 when a vessel sailed from port without the complement of officers as required by the relevant act. See also Soyer (2017), p. 148.

112

[1957] 1 QB 267.

113

Soyer (2017), p. 147.

114

(1844) 7 Man & Gr 457.

115

Jokioinen et al. (2016), p. 52. It is important to note, because of the scope of this chapter, that the LLMC defines the right to limit by reference to ‘shipowners and salvors’, hence seemingly applying to autonomous vessels.

116

Section 2(1) of Consumer Protection Act 1987.

117

Brooke and Forrester (2005), p. 17.

118

Rowland and MacDonald (2005), p. 214.

119

C Reed et al., ‘Responsibility, Autonomy and Accountability: Legal Liability for Machine Learning’ (2016) Queen Mary University of London, School of Law, Legal Studies Research Paper, No. 243/2016, 6.

120

Allianz (2017a, b), Khanna (2017), p. 13.

121

Reed et al. (2016), p. 6.

122

Bernauw (2017), p. 390.

123

Section 4(1)(e) of Consumer Protection Act 1987; Reed et al. (2016), p. 6.

124

(C-300/95) [1997] 3 CMLR 923.

125

Section 4(60)(e) of Consumer Protection Act 1987.

126

Gold (2002).

127

I G P&I website, online at: www.igpandi.org/.

128

Rules of the UK P&I Club Rule Book.

129

UK P&I Club, ‘Q&A, Cyber Risks and P&I Insurance’ (2018) www.ukpandi.com/fileadmin/uploads/uk-pi/Documents/2018/Brochure/Cyber_Risks_and_PandI_Insurance.pdf accessed 09/09/2018.

130

UK P&I Club Rule Book, Addendum for Owners.

131

Rule 5E of the UK P&I Club Rule Book.

132

Hellenic War Risks’C1- 2015 Cyber Losses/Computer Virus Risks www.hellenicwarrisks.com/fileadmin/uploads/hellenic/Docs/PDFs/HWRB_C1-2015_-_Cyber.pdf accessed 09/09/2018.

133

UK P&I Club (2018).

134

GARD (2017); North P&I Club, ‘North P&I Club Highlights the Need for Increased Cyber Security (2016) www.nepia.com/news/press-releases-area/north-pi-club-highlights-the-need-for-increased-cyber-security/ accessed 30/08/2018.

135

GARD (2017).

1 United State Code § 3

Allianz Global Corporate & Speciality (2017a) Ready to launch: Autonomous ships - Smart Sails. www.allianz.com/en_GB/press/news/business/insurance/170824-autonomous-shipping-smart-sails.html. Accessed 9 Sept 2018

Allianz Global Corporate & Speciality (2017b) Safety and Shipping Review 2017, An Annual Review of Trends and Developments in Shipping Losses and Safety. www.agcs.allianz.com/assets/PDFs/Reports/AGCS_Safety_Shipping_Review_2017.pdf. Accessed 8 Sept 2018

Anderson P (2015) The ISM Code: a practical guide to the legal and insurance implications, 3rd edn. Informa

Arvanitis D, Constantino Chagas Lessa J (2014) Offshore platforms’ seafarers: an excluded group within an overlooked sector? Eur Transp Law J 3:133–151

Bernauw K (2017) The insurance of driverless vehicles, pilotless aircraft and unmanned vessels. Eur Transp Law J LII(4):359–391

BIMCO et al (2016) Guidelines on Cyber Security Onboard Ships, Version 1.1

BIMCO et al (2017) Guidelines on Cyber Security Onboard Ships, Version 2.0

Blaskovic-Schnell I (2016) Mobile offshore units and notion of ship in the Norwegian maritime law: implications and challenges. In: Musi M (eds) The ship: an example of legal pluri- qualification. Il Diritto Marittimo – Quaderni, Bonono, pp 167–169

Bork K et al (2008) The legal regulation of floats and gliders—in quest of a new regime? Ocean Dev Int Law 39:298–328CrossRef

Boyes H, Isbell R (2017) UK code of practice, cyber security for ships. UK Department of Transport

British Maritime Law Association (BMLA) (2018) Response to CMI Questionnaire on Unmanned Ships, EME_ACTIVE-568475036.1. https://www.bmla.org.uk/documents/2018/BMLA-Response-to-CMI-Questionnaire-on-Unmanned-Ships.pdf. Accessed 8 Aug 2018

Brooke M, Forrester I (2005) The use of comparative law in A & Others v National Blood Authority. In: Fairgrieve D (eds) Product liability in comparative perspective. Cambridge University Press

Burmeister HC et al (2014) Can unmanned ships improve navigational safety?. Transport Research Arena, Paris. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.846.5385&rep=rep1&type=pdf. Accessed 9 Oct 2018

Cambridge Dictionary Online (2018). https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/cyberattack

Cartwright JE (2011) Memorandum for Chiefs of the Military Servs., Commanders of the Combatant Commands, Dirs. of the Joint Staff Directories on Joint Terminology for Cyberspace Operations. http://www.nsci-va.org/CyberReferenceLib/2010-11-joint%20Terminology%20for%20Cyberspace%20Operations.pdf. Accessed 19 Sept 2018

Chouhan R (2015) Cyber crime escalation vs solutions: a literature snapshot. IJCTM 1:2. http://www.gyanvihar.org/researchjournals/cmt_vol_2_2.pdf. Accessed 14 Oct 2018

Commission v UK (C-300/95) [1997] 3 CMLR 923

Consumer Protection Act 1987 (UK)

Convention on the International Maritime Satellite Organization (IMSO), 1976

Cooper S (2018) Cyber risks, liabilities and insurance in the marine sector. In: Soyer B, Tettenborn A (eds) Maritime liabilities in a global and regional context, 1st edn. Routledge, London, pp 103–118

Danish Maritime Authority (2017) Analysis of Regulatory Barriers to the Use of Autonomous Ships Final Report. Ramboll

Danish Merchant Shipping Act

Daum O, Stellplug T (2017) The implications of international law on unmanned merchant vessels. J Int Marit Law 5:363–374

Davey J (2013) The reform of insurance warranties: a behavioural economics perspective. J Bus Law 1:118–137

Dixon v Sadler (1839) 5 M & W 405

DNV-GL (2016) Recommended Practice – Cyber Security Resilience Management for Ships and Mobile Offshore Units in Operation. DMVGL-RP-0496

Doak v Weekes & Commercial Union Assurance Co plc [1986] 82 FLR 334

Donaldson JL (1999) The ISM Code: the road to discovery? LMCLQ 4:526–535

European Product Liability Directive (1985/374)

Falkanger T et al (2011) Scandinavian maritime law – the Norwegian perspective, 3rd edn. Universitetsforlaget, Oslo

Gahlen S (2014) Ships revisited: a comparative study. J Int Marit Law 20:252–269

GARD (2017) Cyber Security- Managing the Threat. http://www.gard.no/Content/21112216/CyberSecurity. Accessed 14 May 2018

Gauci GM (2016) Is it a vessel, a ship or a boat, is it just a craft, or is it merely a contrivance. J Marit Law Commer 47:479–499

Gault S et al (2016) Marsden and Gault on collisions at sea. Sweet & Maxwell, London

Gold E (2002) Gard handbook on P&I insurance. Gard, Norway

Hellenic War Risks’C1- 2015 Cyber Losses / Computer Virus Risks. https://www.hellenicwarrisks.com/fileadmin/uploads/hellenic/Docs/PDFs/HWRB_C1-2015_-_Cyber.pdf. Accessed 9 Sept 2018

HM Government-UK (2016) National Cyber Security Strategy 2016–2021. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/567242/national_cyber_security_strategy_2016.pdf. Accessed 18 Aug 2018

Hong Kong Fir Shipping Co Ltd v Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd [1962] 2 WLR 474

Hu L et al (2017) COLREGS – compliant path planning for autonomous surface vehicles: a mutiobjective optimization approach. IFAC PapersOnLIne 50(1):13622–13677CrossRef

I G P&I website, online at: www.igpandi.org/

Jokioinen E et al (2016) Advanced Autonomous Waterborne Applications (AAWA) Position Paper, Remote and Autonomous Ships: The Next Steps (Rolls Royce). Available at www.rolls-royce.com/~/media/Files/R/Rolls-Royce/documents/customers/marine/ship-intel/aawa-whitepaper-210616.pdf. Accessed 15 Aug 2018

Katsivela M (2014) Perils of the Sea under English, French and Greek Law; a perilous Venture? J Int Marit Law 20(5):343–355

Khanna R (2017) Heavier weather, increased safety concerns, emerging risks threaten shipping industry. Marit Risk Int 31(1):13

Kongsberg (2018) Autonomous Ship Project, Key Facts about YARA Birkeland. www.km.kongsberg.com. Accessed 15 Aug 2018

KPMG (2017) Cyber Crime Survey Report, Insights and Perspectives. https://assets.kpmg.com/content/dam/kpmg/in/pdf/2017/12/Cyber-Crime-Survey.pdf. Accessed 30 Sept 2018

Lazaratos G (1969) The definition of ship in national and international law. RHDI 22:57

Lloyd’s Register (2017) Cyber Enabled Ships – Ship Right Procedure Assignment For Cyber Descriptive Notes for Autonomous & Remote Access Ships. Lloyd’s Register Guidance Document, Version 2.0

Lowe V (2011) Report on the Interpretation of the Term ‘ship’ in the 1992 Civil Liability Convention. In Consideration of the Definition of ‘Ship’, International Oil Pollution Compensation Funds (IOPC/OCT11/4/4). documentservices.iopcfunds.org/meeting-documents/download/docs/3535/lang/en/. Accessed 18 Aug 2018

Macfarlane R (2017) How to Mitigate Your Risk. Maritime Risk International (18/10/2017)

Marine Insurance Act 1906 (UK)

Marine Insurance Act 1909 (Australian)

Marllow P (2015) Cyber Liability in the Marine Industry Report. https://www.ajg.com/media/1697987/cyber-liability-for-the-marine-industry.pdf. Accessed 9 Oct 2018

McFadden v Blue Star Line [1905] 1 KB 697

Mellilo F (2016) The human element in the autonomous shipping era – essential to avoid gaps. Maritime Risk International, 21/11/2016

Merchant Shipping Act 1894 (UK)

Merchant Shipping Act 1995 (UK)

Merchants Marine Insurance v North of England P & I (1926) 26 Ll L Rep 201

NATO, Translation of Cyber - the Good, the Bad and the Bug-free https://www.nato.int/docu/review/2013/Cyber/timeline/DK/index.htm. Accessed 30 Apr 2018

North P&I Club (2016) North P&I Club Highlights the Need for Increased Cyber Security. http://www.nepia.com/news/press-releases-area/north-pi-club-highlights-the-need-for-increased-cyber-security/. Accessed 30 Aug 2018

P Samuel & Co Ltd v Dumas [1924] AC 431

Polpen Shipping Co Ltd v Commercial Union Assurance Co Ltd [1943] 1 All ER 162; 74 L1 L Rep 157

President of India v West Coast Steamship Co [1963] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 278

Protocol to Amend the International Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules of Law Relating to Bills of Lading (“Visby Rules”) 1968

R v Goodwin [2005] EWCA Crim 3184; [2006] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 432

Redmond v Smith (1844) 7 Man & Gr 457

Reed C et al (2016) Responsibility, autonomy and accountability: legal liability for machine learning. Queen Mary University of London, School of Law, Legal Studies Research Paper, No. 243/2016

Reynardson B et al (2017) CMI International Working Group Position Paper on Unmanned Ships and the International Regulatory Framework

Rowland D, MacDonald E (2005) Information technology law, 3rd edn. Cavendish Publishing

Soyer B (2017) Warranties in marine insurance. Routledge, Oxon

St John Shipping Corp v Joseph Rank Ltd [1957] 1 QB 267

Steedman v Scofield [1992] 2Lloyd’s Rep 163

Switzerland Insurance Australia Ltd v Mowie Fisheries Pty Ltd[1997] FCA 231

The Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation (SUA Convention), 1988

The Convention on Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims (LLMC), 1976

The Eurasian Dream [2002] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 719

The International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL), 73/78

The International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 1974

The International Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules of Law Relating to Bills of Lading (Hague Rules), 1924

The International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage (BUNKER), 2001

The International Convention on Salvage, 1989

The International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW), 1978

The International Maritime Organization (2017a) Guidelines on Maritime Cyber Risk Management MSC-Fal.1/Circ.3

The International Maritime Organization (2017b) Maritime Safety Committee Maritime Cyber Risk Management in Safety Management Systems Resolution MSC. 428(98)

The International Maritime Organization (2018a) Briefing: IMO Takes First Steps to Address Autonomous Ships. http://www.imo.org/en/mediacentre/pressbriefings/pages/08-msc-99-mass-scoping.aspx. Accessed 10 June 2018

The International Maritime Organization (2018b) Maritime Safety Committee (MSC), 99th session 16–25 May 2018

The International Maritime Safety Management (ISM) Code

The International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea (COLREGS Convention), 1972

The International Ship and Port Facility Security (ISPS) Code

The Madeleine [1967] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 224

The Maritime Executive (MAREX) (2018) Shipbuilder Chosen for Yara Birkeland. https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/shipbuilder-chosen-for-yara-birkeland. Accessed 15 Aug 2018

The Maritime Labour Convention, 2006

The Nordic Ferry [1991] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 591

The Norwegian Maritime Code (Act No. 39 of 1994)

The Saldanha [2011] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 187

The Star Sea [2001] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 389

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), 1980

The Xantho (1887) 12 App Cas 503

Thompson v Hopper (1856) 6 E & B 937

Tucker P (2014) Major Cyber Attack Will Cause Significant Loss of Life by 2025, Experts Predict. http://www.defenseone.com/threats/2014/10/cyber-attack-will-cause-significant-loss-life-2025-experts- predict/97688/. Accessed 1 Apr 2018

UK Automated and Electric Vehicles Act 2018

UK P&I Club (2018) Q&A, Cyber Risks and P&I Insurance. https://www.ukpandi.com/fileadmin/uploads/uk-pi/Documents/2018/Brochure/Cyber_Risks_and_PandI_Insurance.pdf. Accessed 9 Sept 2018

UK P&I Club Rule Book

United Nations Convention on Conditions for Registration of Ships, 1986

US Department of transportation, MARAD (2018). https://www.marad.dot.gov/office-of-security/msci/alert/2018/. Accessed 15 Sept 2018

Van Hooydonk E (2014) The law of unmanned merchant shipping—an exploration. J Int Marit Law 20:403–423

Veal R, Tsimplis M (2017) The integration of unmanned ships into the Lex Maritima. Lloyd’s Marit Commer Law Q 2:303–336

Wedderburn v Bell (1807) 1 Camp 1; 170 ER 855

Wee V (2017) Malaysian Bunker Company Cheated of $1.1m in Email Payment Scam. http://www.seatrade-maritime.com/news/asia/malaysian-bunker-company-cheated-of-1-1m-in-email-payment-scam.html. Accessed 20 Sept 2018

Yara (2018) YARA Selects Norwegian Shipbuilder VARD For Zero-Emission Vessel Yara Birkeland. https://www.yara.com/corporate-releases/yara-selects-norwegian-shipbuilder-vard-for-zero-emission-vessel-yara-birkeland/. Accessed 15 Aug 2018.

Yeomans G (2014) Autonomous Vehicles- Handing over Control: Opportunities and Risks for Insurance. https://www.lloyds.com/news-and-risk-insight/risk-reports/library/technology/autonomous-vehicles. Accessed 9 Oct 2018

Titel: A New Era, a New Risk! “A Study on the Impact of the Developments of New Technologies in the Shipping Industry and Marine Insurance Market”
verfasst von: Julia Constantino Chagas Lessa
Belma Bulut
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Buch: InsurTech: A Legal and Regulatory View
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-27385-9

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-030-27386-6

Copyright-Jahr: 2020
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27386-6_15

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Premium Partner