These proceedings arose out of damage caused to the Belize Barrier Reef by the grounding of the Westerhaven. The Attorney-General of Belize, claiming 'as the owner, custodian and guardian of the Belize Barrier Reef' issued proceedings against the defendants seeking to recover over BZD 31 million in damages.

The defendants conceded liability for the damage caused by the ship running aground on the Barrier Reef. However, the second defendant, Reider Shipping BV, as charterer of the ship, claimed that its liability was limited under the Convention on Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims 1976 (LLMC 1976) which applies in Belize by virtue of s 62 of the Harbours and Merchant Shipping Act of Belize and by the Merchant Shipping Act 1894 (UK) as amended by subsequent Merchant Shipping Acts. The second defendant argued that art 6.1.b of LLMC 1976 provides for the calculation of limits of liability in respect of claims other than claims for loss of life or personal injury, and that the liability in respect of the ship calculated accordingly is limited to USD 2,009,347.49.

On the other hand, the claimant contended that the relevant applicable legal instrument was the 1996 Protocol to the LLMC 1976, which substantially increases the limit of liability for all tonnages of vessel. The claimant further argued that its claim for environmental damage to the reef was not, in any event, subject to limitation of liability under the LLMC regime.

Held: The LLMC 1976 rather than the LLMC 1996 is the applicable limitation of liability regime in Belize. However, the claim in this case is not subject to limitation of liability.

As to the applicable limitation of liability regime, whatever the position may be in the United Kingdom, and notwithstanding s 62 of Belize’s Merchant Shipping Act, it is the LLMC 1976 that has the force of law in Belize. The authority for this proposition is to be found in s 3(1) of the International Maritime Organization Act 2008. Section 3(1) of this Act provides: 'Notwithstanding any other law, but subject to the provisions of this Act, the IMO Conventions and Protocols acceded to by Belize, as listed in the Schedule hereto, shall have the force of law in Belize.' In the Schedule to the Act, the first Convention/Protocol listed is the LLMC 1976 to which Belize had acceded on 31 January 1980. Therefore, it is the LLMC 1976 which, for the purposes of limitation of liability for maritime claims in Belize, is operational and effective and the applicable instrument.

The LLMC 1976 sets out a code for the proper conduct and management of limitation claims. It provides in art 1 for the persons entitled to limit liability, which in the instant case clearly includes the defendants as shipowners and charterers of the Westerhaven; it provides in art 2 for the types of claims subject to limitation; it provides in art 3 the claims that are not subject to limitation; and in art 4, for the kinds of conduct that will disentitle a claim for limitation of liability; art 6 provides for the calculation of the limits of liability - generally with regard to the tonnage of the ship in question; art 8 provides for the unit of account to be the Special Drawing Right as defined by the International Monetary Fund which shall be converted into the national currency of the State in which limitation is sought; art 10 provides that limitation of liability may be invoked notwithstanding that a limitation fund has not been constituted; art 11 provides for the constitution of the limitation fund; art 12 provides for the distribution of the fund; and art 13 provides for the consequences of the constitution of a limitation fund under art 11: it provides a bar to other actions by a person who has made a claim against the fund from exercising any right in respect of such a claim against any other assets of the person or on behalf of whom the fund has been constituted; and after the constitution of the fund for the ship or other property of the creator of the fund, if arrested or so attached, to be released either by order of court or other competent authority; and that such release shall always be ordered if the limitation fund that has been constituted in any of the places stated.

As to the second question, the burden in seeking to disapply the limitation provisions of the LLMC 1976 which operate in favour of a defendant shipowner, charterer etc as defined in art 1 of the LLMC 1976 is on the claimant. The crucial question is whether the damage for which the claim is made in this case relating to the Belize Barrier Reef can come within the claims subject to limitation as provided for in art 2 of the LLMC 1976. This case cannot properly or reasonably be subsumed under either art 2.1.a or 2.1.c of the LLMC 1976. The Belize Barrier Reef is not 'property' for the purposes of the limitation of liability for a claim in respect of it. The claim for damage and injury to the environment as a result of the grounding of the Westerhaven on the Barrier Reef, is not a 'claim in respect of other loss resulting from infringement of rights other than contractual rights'. It is a claim that is clearly sui generis and does not flow from infringement of rights, whether or not contractual. It is clearly a claim in respect of the ecology of the Barrier Reef and of the marine environment. The LLMC 1976 therefore does not apply to this claim.