How to Account the \u27\u27special compensation\u27\u27 in the International Convention on Salvage, 1989

Međunarodna konvencija o spašavanju, iz 1989., veliku pozornost posvećuje i zaštiti morskog okoliša. Poglavito su značajne odredbe čl. 14 koje, uvodeći tzv. posebnu naknadu, korigiraju načelo \u27no cure - no pay\u27 na kojemu se ipak i ova Konvencija zasniva. To znači da u slučaju kada je spašavatelj spašavao brod koji je sam ili s teretom prijetio štetom za okoliš, ali nije prema članku 13. ostvario nagradu barem u visini posebne naknade koja se procjenjuje u skladu s člankom 14., imat će pravo na posebne naknade od vlasnika toga broda u visini troškova. Članak 14. stavak 3. utvrđuje te troškove spašavatelja. Ako je spašavatelj u svojim operacijama spriječio ili smanjio štetu okolišu, posebna naknada, koju vlasnik plaća spašavatelju, može se povećati do najviše 30 posto od troškova koje je spašavatelj imao. Međutim sud, ako smatra pravednim i opravdanim, a imajući na umu bitna mjerila u članku 13. stavku 1., može povećati posebnu naknadu i preko toga iznosa, s time da ukupno povećanje ni u kojem slučaju ne može biti veće od 100 posto troškova koje je imao spašavatelj. Troškovi spašavatelja u smislu posebne naknade označuju gotovinske troškove koje je spašavatelj razumno imao tijekom spašavanja i pravedni omjer za opremu i osoblje stvarno i razumno korištenu u spašavanju, uzimajući u obzir mjerila spomenuta u članku 13. stavku 1. točki (h), (i) i (j), tj. brzinu kojom je usluga pružena, raspoloživost i uporabu brodova ili druge opreme namijenjene operacijama spašavanja, te stanje spremnosti, sposobnosti i vrijednosti opreme spašavatelja. U čuvenom sudskom sporu \u27Nagasaki Spirit\u27 u Velikoj Britaniji Dom Lordova je u veljači 1997. godine konačno razjasnio izričaj \u27\u27pravedni (pravični) omjer\u27\u27 (engl. fair rate, franc. somme équitable). Spašavatelju bi trebalo priznati i dodatni izdatak koji proizlazi iz zahtjeva, potreba, nužnosti da sredstva za spašavanje uvijek budu na raspolaganju ( uključuju se i troškovi održavanja, ulaganja, pada vrijednosti i vremena koje je izgubljeno ), ali taj izričaj ne znači nagradu, ne može se sastojati od bilo kakvog dobitka (profita). Ova je odluka također značajna jer utvrđuje i da se članak 14. primjenjuje na cjelokupno razdoblje pruženih usluga spašavanja, čak i onda kada je rizik štete za morski okoliš prestao ranije.The International Convention on Salvage, 1989, devotes a significant part to the protection of the marine environment. Especially important is article 14 which introduces \u27\u27special compensation\u27\u27 as a corrective means of the traditional \u27\u27no cure - no pay\u27\u27 principle. This means that if the salvor has carried out salvage operations in respect of a vessel which by itself or by its cargo threatened with damage to the environment and has failed to earn a reward under a well-known criteria set out in article 13, at least a reward equivalent to special compensation assessable in accordance with article 14, he shall be entitled to special compensation from the owner of that vessel equivalent to his expenses. Article 14, paragraph 3, defines the salvor\u27s expenses. If the salvor has prevented or minimized damage to the environment by his salvage operations, special compensation payable by the owner of the salvor may be increased up to a maximum of 30 per cent of the expenses incurred by the salvor. However, the tribunal, if it deems it fair and just to do so and bearing in mind the relevant criteria set out in article 13, paragraph 1, may further increase such special compensation, but in no event shall total increase exceed 100 per cent of the expenses incurred by the salvor. Salvor\u27s expenses for the purpose of special compensation means the out-of-pocket expenses reasonably incurred by the salvor in the salvage operations and a fair rate for equipment and personnel actually and reasonably used in the salvage operations, taking into consideration the criteria set out in article 13, paragraph 1(h), (i) and (j), i.e. the promptness of the services rendered, the availability and use of vessels or other equipment intended for salvage operations and the state of readiness and efficiency of the salvor\u27s equipment and the value thereof. In the famous case \u27\u27Nagasaki Spirit\u27\u27 in England the House of Lords finally clarified in February 1997 the issue of \u27\u27fair rate\u27\u27 as one which should be based not only on out-of-pocket expenses but should include the element of maintenance, investment, depreciation and idle time. But the fair rate should not be a profitable one, namely it does not include any element of profit. The decision is also important in confirming that any claim under article 14 will apply for the whole period of the services even if the risk of damage to the environment has been stopped at an earlier stage of service