Marcel Verhagen
DOCK Legal Experts, Rotterdam
verhagen@docklaw.nl

Introduction

Dutch law on limitation of maritime claims is primarily based on international conventions, supplemented by provisions in the Dutch Civil Code (Burgerlijk Wetboek, BW) and the Dutch Code of Civil Procedure (Wetboek van Burgerlijke Rechtsvordering, Rv).

The legal framework

The LLMC Convention

The Netherlands is a party to the Convention on Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims 1976 (LLMC 1976); and the 1996 Protocol to the LLMC (as amended). The Netherlands has implemented the LLMC in Book 8 of the Dutch Civil Code.

The CLNI Convention 2012

The Netherlands is a party to the Strasbourg Convention of 2012 on the Limitation of Liability in Inland Navigation. The Netherlands has also implemented the CLNI in Book 8 of the Dutch Civil Code. As of 1 March 2025, the limits have been increased pursuant to a Decree adopted under Article 8:1065 of the Dutch Civil Code.

The CLC Convention 1992 and Fund Convention 1992

The Netherlands is a party to the Civil Liability Convention 1992 and the Fund Convention 1992. The Netherlands has also adopted the Supplementary Fund Protocol 2003. The CLC has been implemented in the Liability for Oil Tankers Act.

Who may limit liability?

LLMC

Under Dutch law (in line with the LLMC), the following parties may limit liability:

• shipowners (including registered owners, charterers, and operators);
• salvors;
• insurers of liable parties;
• crew members (in certain circumstances).

The term ‘shipowner’ is interpreted broadly and includes bareboat charterers and operators, reflecting the commercial realities of shipping operations.

CLNI

Under Dutch law, the shipowner of an inland barge as per (which includes the owner charterer manager or party that commercially operates the vessel) may limit the liability.

A crew member may only rely on the limitation of liability in case it also qualifies as ‘shipowner’ in the sense of the CLNI.

CLC

In accordance with the CLC Convention the registered owner of a ship in the sense of the CLC convention may limit its liability. The liability is also channelled to the owner of the ship.

Claims subject to limitation

LLMC

The LLMC regime covers a wide range of maritime claims, including:

• claims for loss of life or personal injury;
• claims for loss of or damage to property (including cargo and port infrastructure);
• claims arising from delay in carriage;
• claims related to salvage operations;
• wreck removal (subject to reservations; the Netherlands has made specific declarations in this respect).

However, certain claims are excluded from limitation, including:

• claims for salvage remuneration;
• general average contributions;
• oil pollution claims governed by the CLC/Fund Conventions;
• nuclear damage claims.

CLNI

The CLNI allows the owner to limit its liability for the following claims for:

• loss of life or personal injury and property damage, including consequential damages, that have arisen on board and are directly related to the operation of the vessel or in relation to salvage;
• delay in the carriage of goods, baggage or persons;
• economic losses as a consequence of a non-contractual damage;
• salvage or wreck removal;
• salvage of cargo.

The CLC Convention allows the owner to limit its liability for claims caused by pollution to persons, goods and property, and environment, caused by a spillage. This will include the cost of reasonable measures to prevent pollution damage and the reasonable cost for the repair of the environment in so far as these have actually been incurred.

Loss of the right to limit

A key feature of the LLMC, and therefore Dutch law, is that the right to limit is difficult to break. Under Article 4 LLMC, a person liable shall not be entitled to limit liability if it is proved that the loss resulted from their personal act or omission, committed with the intent to cause such loss, or recklessly and with knowledge that such loss would probably result.

This is a very high threshold. Dutch courts apply this test strictly, and in practice, breaking limitation is rare.

Constitution of a limitation fund

In the Netherlands, a liable party may constitute a limitation fund before the competent Dutch court, which is typically the District Court of Rotterdam in maritime matters.

Procedure

The procedure is governed by the Dutch Code of Civil Procedure and includes:

• filing a petition to establish the fund;
• court determination of the fund amount;
• provision of security (usually a bank guarantee or Protection & Immunity Club letter of undertaking);
• publication and invitation to creditors to file claims.

Once the fund is established:

• individual enforcement actions are stayed;
• claims must be brought against the fund;
• distribution takes place on a pro rata basis.

Wreck Removal and Special Regimes

The Netherlands has made use of the option under Article 18 LLMC to exclude certain wreck removal claims from limitation. In practice, wreck removal in Dutch waters may be subject to specific national legislation and international conventions such as the Nairobi Wreck Removal Convention, to which the Netherlands is also a party and which convention is implemented in Dutch legislation in the Maritime Accident Control Act 2016 and subsequent legislation.

Mv Bow Jubail

In June 2018, the chemical tanker Bow Jubail collided with a jetty of a tank terminal in Rotterdam. With this allision, the Bow Jubail punctured one of her bunker tanks causing an oil spill in the port of Rotterdam. This spillage led to a decision of the Supreme Court.^[1] The Court upheld a decision of the Court of Appeal of The Hague,^[2] in which the latter Court decided that the Bunker Convention 2021 is not applicable when the oil escapes from a vessel that falls under the scope of the CLC Convention.

The Court of Appeal further ruled that it is upon the owners of the vessel to prove that the ship is clean, meaning that no residues of persistent oil is on board. The vessel carried persistent oil on board prior to the allision but had her tanks cleaned and had some slops on board that had to be discharged. The Court of Appeal held that it is up to the owner to prove that either there are no residues on board or at most a negligible quantity. What this quantity is, the Court did not decide.

The Court also ruled that the mere fact that from the ships administration and documentation the vessel was ‘MARPOL clean’ is insufficient to prove that no residues of persistent oil are on board. Consequently, the shipowner could not limit as per the LLMC (as arranged for in the Bunker Convention) but the CLC Convention applies to this case.

Jurisdiction and international aspects

Dutch courts generally accept jurisdiction to establish a limitation fund when:

• the incident occurred in the Netherlands;
• the vessel is arrested in the Netherlands; or
• proceedings on the merits are pending before a Dutch court.

The establishment of a limitation fund in the Netherlands may have international recognition under the LLMC, although this depends on the circumstances and the states involved.

Conclusion

The Dutch regime on limitation of maritime claims is firmly rooted in the LLMC Convention and reflects the Netherlands’ strong maritime tradition. It provides:

• predictability through tonnage-based limits as per the various conventions;
• strong protection for shipowners and related parties;
• a high threshold for breaking limitation;
• an efficient procedural mechanism for constituting limitation funds.

At the same time, specific claims, particularly those relating to pollution and wreck removal, may fall under separate regimes or national rules.