Superyacht standards should be set higher than letter of the law'
By Ian Biles
from an original article for The Triton
"The yachting industry is about having fun." This is an expression that is often heard throughout the large yacht industry and, indeed, it is correct. However, what is often misunderstood is precisely who will be having that "fun."
Superyachts are some of the most valuable movable assets in the world. For the owner, having and using a yacht should be enjoyable. However, for the people who make their livings managing or operating these superyachts, yachting should be professional. This does not mean they should not enjoy their work but it does mean that the individual should recognize the responsibility that comes with being paid to do a job.
It is perceived that regulations have been creeping into the superyacht arena, notwithstanding that they have been there all along. Many people forget that regulations are minimum standards. A superyacht deserves the best standards in all areas and this should be without compromise.
International regulations come about through a range of international bodies. In the marine environment, the main body is the International Maritime Organization. The responsible organization (as the coordinating body) seeks consensus among interested parties to introduce a set of regulations, normally in response to a major incident. As with any consensus, this involves compromise, which introduces the opportunity for different pressures to be brought to bear and for different organizations to exert influence to achieve their particular goal. The net effect is that the "standard" is the lowest on which all parties can agree.
Thus, while regulation has a place, in superyacht context, the standard that such regulations set is significantly below the standards toward which most yachts should aspire.
A classic example of this is the comfort and safety of the owner and his guests. Nobody involved with running a superyacht would disagree that their safety is paramount. History suggests (from insurance claims records) that one of the greatest dangers for a superyacht in terms of financial loss is fire in harbor. Therefore, as a standard, it is reasonable to anticipate that captains, managers and crews would be aware of this and undertake every precaution necessary.
Unfortunately, practice does not bear this out. Most (but not all) superyachts comply with the letter of current regulations (the lowest common standard), but few actively investigate or remain current with best practice for fire prevention and containment. The same is true of some yacht management organizations.
It is against this background that this module has been prepared. It has drawn on my 10 years of experience assisting owners in evaluating risks faced by their yacht operation and putting in place management systems that help reduce (but never eliminate) the potential for harmful incidents.
A hierarchy of standards
As the coverage and sources of regulations applying to a superyacht are so wide ranging, how does a captain, manager or crew member ascertain the standard they should apply in the management of the yacht? For the purposes of this module, standards have been presented in the following five main categories:
1. The law. All vessels must comply with legislation and these are the minimum standards with which they must comply. International legislation includes the Conventions adopted by the IMO (such as SOLAS, MARPOL, STCW and the COLREGS) together with other Conventions from organizations such as the International Labour Organization and provision of EC Treaties and Regulations. National legislation includes, for example in the UK, the Merchant Shipping Acts and the MCA Large Yacht Code for yachts that charter.
2. Non-compulsory codes of practice. This category is well illustrated if an owner of a yacht that does not charter has decided to comply with the MCA Large Yacht Code and to have the yacht certified as such. The standards will be higher, but law does not require compliance with those standards.
3. Advisory information and guidance provided by various professional bodies, such as the International Chamber of Shipping, the Professional Yachtsmen's Association and the Royal Yachting Association. Once again, the recommendations supplied by these bodies may require a higher standard than the minimum.
4. Customary practice (respected references, publications and periodicals). Whether these are the most stringent standards is debatable, however they should be taken into account when considering a particular piece of equipment or standard.
5. The owner's requirements. These may or may not extend to the safety of the vessel and they may be higher than those required by the legislation and guidance mentioned above.
Frequently there are areas where recommendations and even legislation have different and even incompatible specifications for a particular item of equipment or a procedure. In determining which particular category takes precedence, in the absence of specific regulatory guidance (which is, of itself, unclear) individuals should adopt a position of "reasonableness." That is to say the captain, manager or owner should do what they consider to be "reasonable" so that any other individual faced with the same set of circumstances would also consider the action to be reasonable.
Clearly, the captain, crew member or manager needs to be mindful of how the authorities (or lawyers suing on behalf of an injured party) might approach the relevance of any particular standard. The law may not lay down a specific requirement to meet a particular standard but, if there is a close parallel that could reasonably be applied to the yacht, it might be difficult to successfully argue that such a standard should not have been met.
Ian Biles is the founder of Maritime Services International, a marine surveying and consultancy business. He holds a Class I (Unlimited) Master's certificate and developed a risk management program for large yachts for a London-based underwriter. Contact him at info@maritime.uk.com or +44 (0)2392 524490.
