This was a claim brought by the Pacific Ocean Directorate of the Federal Service for Supervision of Natural Resources of Russia (the claimant) against DV-Aquatoria LLC (the charterer) for damage caused to the marine environment by an oil spill from the Nadezhda in the amount of RUB 329,124,722.75. The registered owner of the Nadezhda was Rostorg LLC, which joined the proceedings as a co-defendant.

On 28 November 2015, the Nadezhda was grounded. As a result, the vessel suffered hull damage, and oil from the vessel’s tanks spilled. The damage caused to the maritime environment was calculated by the claimant in accordance with the Methods of calculation of compensation for damage caused to the maritime environment adopted by Order of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment of Russia No 87 dated 13 April 2009 (the Metodika). Compensation for this damage was claimed from the charterer of the vessel and its registered owner.

Held: The Court satisfied the claim against the registered owner and dismissed the claim against the charterer.

According to s 3(2) of the Metodika, the damage caused to the maritime environment means any damage as a result of contamination by oil, hazardous substances, wastewater, or rubbish. Therefore, it was found that the damage caused to the waters of the Japanese Sea as a result of the incident was covered by the Metodika.

Under art 219 of the Merchant Shipping Code of Russia (the MSC RF), the charterer is not liable before any third parties regarding the use of the vessel, excluding claims regarding oil pollution and the damage caused by the transportation of hazardous substances. According to art 316.1 of the MSC RF, the vessel's registered owner is liable for any damage caused by the oil spill as a result of the incident. Per art 316.2.7 of the MSC RF, the incident means any occurrence or series of occurrences that caused pollution or serious and direct risk of pollution.

Therefore, the Court concluded that the MSC RF establishes a presumption of the registered owner’s fault for the pollution damage. As the MSC RF stipulates that the person liable for the oil pollution is the registered owner, the proper defendant for the claim was the registered owner of the vessel, and not its charterer.

With regard to the amount of liability, the Court held that the CLC 1969 and the CMI Guidelines on Oil Pollution Damage approved by the 35th Conference of the CMI (Sydney) do not apply to this case. This is so because the CLC 1969 regulates economic liability caused by oil pollution, while the Metodika stipulates liability for environmental damage. Therefore, the liability of the shipowner to State bodies for environmental damage may be calculated in contradiction to the CLC 1969.