Shipping 2026

ISRAEL Law and Practice Contributed by: Joseph Sprinzak and Rahel Rimon, J.SPRINZAK

3.2 International Conventions: Collision and Salvage With regard to matters of salvage, see 3.1 Interna- tional Conventions: Pollution and Wreck Removal . In terms of collision, Israel has ratified the Interna - tional Regulations for Preventing Collisions as Sea, 1972 (COLREG 72) and incorporated them into Israeli law via the Ports (Preventing Collisions at Sea) Regu - lations 1972. Israel is not a party to the Salvage Convention 1989. Section 41 (7) of the Shipping (Vessels) Law – 1960 creates a statutory lien for damages resulting from col - lisions or damage caused by the vessel to port instal - lations, buildings and dry docks, as well as loss or damage to cargo and to passengers’ personal effects. 3.3 Convention on Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims The Israeli Shipping Law (Limitation on a Ship-Owner’s Liability) – 1965 adopts the International Convention relating to the liability of Owners of Sea-Going Ships (Brussels, 10 October 1957). As Israel has not ratified the International Convention on Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims, 1976 (“LLMC 1976”), no limitation is available for those claims introduced by the LLMC 1976 and not found in the 1957 Convention. Accordingly, the types of claims subject to limitation of liability are those set out in Articles 1 (a)–(c) of the 1957 Convention. Claims that are not subject to limi - tation of liability are set out in Article 1 (4) of the 1957 Convention. The Israel Shipping (Limitation on a Ship-Owner’s Lia - bility) (Amendment) Law – 1987 amended the 1965 Law previously referred to by adopting the 1979 Pro - tocol and replacing gold francs with Special Draw - ing Rights (SDR). Pursuant to the 1979 Protocol, the limitations of liability applicable in Israel are SDR66.67 per tonne for cargo claims and SDR206.67 per tonne for personal claims. It should be noted that the Shipping (Limitation on a Ship-Owner’s Liability) (Amendment) Bill, 2015 pro -

poses that Israel adopt the 1976 Convention, together with the Protocols of 1996 and 2012. The proposed law intends to allow salvors to limit their liability. 3.4 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties Israel has not ratified the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. However, Israeli courts and legal authorities generally regard the Vienna Conven - tion as a persuasive reflection of customary interna - tional law on treaty interpretation and may refer to its principles, including those on interpretation and non-retroactivity, as an interpretative aid when con - struing treaties binding on Israel. In the context of limitation of liability, Israel has implemented the 1957 Brussels Limitation Convention through the Shipping Law (Limitation of Liability of Sea-Going Ships), 1965, and has not adopted the 1976 LLMC. Accordingly, any limitation issues before Israeli courts would arise under the 1957 regime as incorporated into domestic law, with the Vienna Convention potentially serving as a non-binding interpretative reference, in a manner broadly consistent with the approach endorsed by the UK Supreme Court in MSC Flaminia . 3.5 Procedure and Requirements for Establishing a Limitation Fund Owners can apply to the Admiralty Court to establish a limitation fund, calculated as set out in 3.3 Conven- tion on Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims . The Court will give orders as to the ship-owner’s deposit and the manner in which notices will be pub - lished to creditors. It should be noted that the Israeli courts accept the deposit of funds in Israeli currency, in a sum deter - mined by the court. However, parties will often agree on the provision of local bank guarantees and, in some cases, foreign bank guarantees. Further, as the Israeli Admiralty Court has accepted letters of undertaking issued by P&I clubs as security for the release of ves - sels from arrest (in essence, in a manner similar to the position taken in the English case Atlantik Confidence [2014] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 586), it seems likely that they would follow the same approach and accept letters of undertaking issued by P&I clubs in lieu of limitation funds.

285 CHAMBERS.COM