English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Oil spill incidents may cause damage of several different types: damage to property, consequential loss, pure economic loss, and damage to the environment. The last type presents the greatest problems in connection with liability and compensation, because it is not easily assessed in monetary terms. This paper focuses on the problems relating to non-economic damage to the marine environment and economic loss as a consequence of damage to the environment. Some leading court cases are used to illustrate some of the problems. The definition of “pollution damage” in the international conventions, i.e., the 1969 Civil Liability Convention and the 1971 Fund Convention, is discussed. The position taken by the International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund in respect to claims for non-economic damage to the environment as well as claims for pure economic loss is described. The impact the new definition of this notion in the 1984 protocol to the Civil Liability Convention would have on the law of contracting states is examined.

THE NOTION OF “POLLUTION DAMAGE,” WITH PARTICULAR REGARD TO DAMAGE TO THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT