The appeal in cassation is directed against the judgment delivered 20 April 2015 by the Antwerp Court of Appeal.

Held: Appeal dismissed.

As to the first ground of appeal:

In accordance with art 1.c of the Act of 11 April 1989 (Wrakkenwet/Wrecks Act), the Convention on the Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims 1976 (LLMC 1976) is to have full effect in Belgium, except for arts 2.1.d and 2.1.e. It follows that the legislator exercised its right of reservation under art 18 of the LLMC 1976 to exclude the application of arts 2.1.d and 2.1.e of this Convention.

Pursuant to art 9 of the Wrecks Act, arts 2.1.d and 2.1.e of the LLMC 1976 apply to vessels of inland navigation and similar floating structures. It is apparent that the legislator has thus applied art 15.2.a of LLMC 1976, under which a State may regulate by express provisions of national law the limitation of liability regime applicable to ships which are, under the law of that State, intended for navigation on inland waterways.

The Wrecks Act therefore contains no internal contradiction or inconsistency in providing that arts 2.1.d and 2.1.e of the LLMC 1976 do not apply to vessels that are well suited to be used as inland navigation vessels. The appellate Judges were thus able to consider, without disregarding the principle of legal certainty or violating the constitutional and legal provisions relied on, that the first defendant had the right to invoke the LLMC 1976 to limit its responsibility with regard to the actions referred to in arts 2.1.d and 2.1.e of the Convention.

As to the second ground of appeal:

Under art 14 of the Wrecks Act, the authority may ex officio and at the risk of the owner and the person responsible for the event which caused the vessel to sink or strand: (a) raise, remove, destroy or rendering harmless the ship or (b) remove, destroy or render harmless the cargo of the ship. Article 16 of the Wrecks Act provides that whoever is responsible for the event which caused the vessel to sink or strand shall be obliged to pay to the authority the costs resulting therefrom for the ex officio execution of wreck removal measures under art 14. Under art 18 of the Wrecks Act, the owner of a seagoing vessel who, by virtue of art 16, is liable for the payment of costs, may limit its liability for payment at the amounts fixed in this provision. The measures provided for in arts 14.a and 14.b of the Wrecks Act are similar to the actions referred to in arts 2.1.d and 2.1.e of the LLMC 1976.

It is clear from art 1.c of the Wrecks Act that, with regard to sea-going vessels, such actions are excluded from the application of the limitation of liability regime of the LLMC 1976. However, it is apparent from art 18 of the Wrecks Act that the legislator has submitted those measures, in the case of sea-going vessels, to a specific limitation of liability regime. The legislator thus intended to moderate the limited liability which would result for sea-going vessels from the exclusion of these ships from the application of the LLMC 1976. The alleged inequality of treatment concerns different kinds of construction.