News about the State of Alarm in Spain (April 6th, 2020)

On April 4th, the President of the Spanish Government announced his intention to request the Congress of Deputies to agree to the extension of the State of Alarm for at least 15 days more. Therefore the State of Alarm, enacted on March 14th, will be maintained until midnight of April 25th.

His petition seems to have the support of the leaders of the rest of the political forces in the State; nevertheless, the extension will not be made official until it is approved by the Congress of Deputies at the forthcoming plenary session scheduled for April 9th.

However, and as the President Pedro Sánchez has already announced, the extension of the State of Alarm does not necessarily imply the extension of the suspension of non-essential activities, a suspension tackled in our publication of April 2 (RDL 10/2020 of March 29th – Suspension of Non-essential Activities) that, since these restrictive economic measures were made public, has received a lot of criticism and pressure to analyse its possible moderation or suppression. Both on part of the industries that asked to maintain their essential activities in order to prevent the total economy freeze, and the political forces in the country. Therefore, and depending on the decisions made by the Government, these non-essential activities might be reactivated from April 9th. 

As we have seen, during the three weeks of the State of Alarm that we have already undergone in Spain, this situation is having an enormous impact on all social and economic sectors in Spain and, in particular, the sectors of industry, commerce and trade, and a part of the transportation sector have been severely hit by this situation.

 

FISHERIES SECTOR 

The Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food published Order APA/315/2020 of April 1st in the BOE (Official State Gazette). This Order establishes new criteria for the management of fishing quotas assigned to the Kingdom of Spain in order to optimize their use and modifies certain Ministerial Orders that regulate these concepts since 2014.  

This Order is mainly applicable to the stocks subject to the total allowable catches and quotas in the peninsula waters of the Atlantic Ocean. 

These are the main measures that have been taken: 

  • Flexibilization of the transmissions of fishing possibilities (quotas) for the vessels with individual distribution, thus allowing a better adaptation to the fisheries within the previously established distribution, that is to say, that the vessels themselves through the transmissions regulate the distribution of quotas. Those operating in the Bay of Biscay and the Northwest, Gulf of Cadiz and those trawling in Portuguese waters. 
  • Establishment of a mechanism for the annual optimisation of the boilermakers’ quotas. As of October 1st, vessels that have already exhausted their quotas will be able to continue fishing and using the quotas that will be left over for other vessels, thus guaranteeing the full use of the quotas allocated.
  • Establishment of procedures for the management of quotas allocated to Spain but which, until now, have mostly not been established. 
  • Establishment of criteria for the annual allocation of quotas not yet allocated in Spain, (blue whiting or horse mackerel in EU waters and swordfish in the North Atlantic). 
  • Establishment of uniform procedures for the cessation of activity and the closure of fisheries in cases where quotas have been exhausted. 
  • Establishment of management measures for recreational fisheries for sea bream in the Cantabrian Sea. 

The Order APA/315/2020, of April 1st, reinforces Spain’s commitment to sustainable and responsible fisheries management and shows progress in the regulation regarding the fishing quotas assigned to Spain.  

 

LAND TRANSPORT

Many measures are being taken with regard to land transport as it is an essential resource to secure the local supply chain, above all on local and national level. 

Administrations are beginning to ensure the protection of truck carriers by distributing personal protective equipment by enabling filling stations and providing places for weekly rest of at least 24 hours. 

Likewise, the National Road Transport Committee communicated to the Ministry of Transport its commitment to maintain transport and guarantee the supply of medicines in hospitals during the Easter weeks. 

For its part, rail transport is also adapting to this situation and some initiatives are already beginning to be made public, such as adapting trains of the Operator Renfe for the transport of patients affected by COVID-19 between different autonomous communities. 

 

AIR TRANSPORT

The Spanish airports are adapting to the COVID-19, among other forms, by enabling their esplanades to offer parking to the planes that, due to the evident reduction of flights, are not operating and therefore have to remain on the ground. 

Since the health emergency does not only affect Spain but it is a global phenomenon, many flights and many regular lines operated by air operators will be suspended for an undefined period of time.

 

MARITIME TRANSPORTATION

With regard to maritime transport, it is important to highlight the change of direction that the maritime industry is taking in order to face the pandemic. 

Many shipping companies are temporarily suspending some of their usual shipping lines, as well as adapting their rotations to the progressive increase in Asian imports to the demanding European continent. This increase is materialized in the fact that rates from the Mediterranean to the Far East have increased by 42.4% and in the oil price crash. 

Although there are shipping companies that have decided to suspend temporary their services with stopovers in Spanish ports, there are still sufficient services to guarantee the supply chain. 

For its part, the Spanish ports have been taking measures to mitigate the effects that might arise from abandonment of goods and containers in the ports (in many cases forced). Let us take as an example the Port of Barcelona that has implemented the so called “flat rate” regarding the cost resulting from storage of the containers in the ports with the aim to mitigate the economic impact that COVID-19 is producing in the importing companies. 

This measure adopted by the Port of Barcelona shall be applicable to the import containers located in the container terminals of the enclave between March 31st and April 13th (for the time being). According the experts’ estimation, the cost of storage of the containers will be reduced by 65 % as a result of these measures.

As we can observe, all sectors are renewing and readapting themselves in this uncertain and unknown situation we are just undergoing in order to guarantee the supply chain of products and materials, securing so that basic needs of the citizens are met and that the industries, to the maximum possible extent, continue operating.

RDL 10/2020, of March 29th, Suspension of Non-essential Activities

The recent Royal Decree Law nº 10/2020, of March 29th  orders the suspension of companies and non-essential works as a consequence of the declaration of the state of alarm issued on March 14th, an order that certainly affects both the economy and society in a global way.  

This suspension will last 11 days, from March 30th to April 9th, both inclusive, establishing that March 30th is considered a day of adaptation to enable the closure of all non-essential activities that shall be suspended in the following days. During this period the remuneration of the employees will be secured by means of the “recoverable paid leave”, as approved by the Government on March 29th. 

The problem is that the classification of activities which are considered essential and those which are not has caused controversy the first day of the shutdown. Consequently, the Government issued the Order SND/307/2020, of March 30th, which establishes the imperative criteria for application of the Royal Decree-Law 10/2020, of March 29th, and the model of statement of responsibility which allows the necessary journeys between the worker’s residence and the workplace, which supplements the RDL but without clarifying all the questions and doubts arising from the very same RDL. 

Let us recall that the Royal Decree law 463/2020, of March 14th, by means of which the state of alarm was declared in order to manage the health crisis situation caused by COVID-19, states that the supply of the population must be guaranteed at all times, by facilitating and ensuring the transport of goods throughout the national territory. On this basis, it should be noted that land transport companies and those companies related to maritime and air traffic pursuing or enabling this aim (without being this a limiting list), as well as the facilities providing these services shall guarantee their activity throughout the whole period of the state of alarm. In fact, Mrs. María José Rallo, the Secretary General for Transport, declared that transport is obviously included within the essential activities, and State Ports has initiated an information campaign to emphasize the functioning of the state port system to guarantee the distribution of essential items and goods during the COVID-19 crisis. 

Abiding to the sixth point of the annex of the RDL nº 10/2020, states: “The recoverable paid leave regulated by this royal decree-law is not applicable to the following employees: 6. Those who carry out transport services, both for people and goods, which continue to be carried out since the declaration of the state of alarm, as well as those who must ensure the maintenance of the means used for this purpose, under the protection of the regulations approved by the competent authority and the competent authorities delegated since the declaration of the state of alarm”. 

Similarly, article 4 of the RDL 10/2020 specifies what shall be understood as the minimum indispensable activity: “The companies that must apply the recoverable paid leave regulated in this article may, if necessary, establish the minimum number of staff or work shifts that are strictly indispensable in order to maintain the essential activity. This activity and this minimum number of staff or shifts shall be based on the activity carried out during an ordinary weekend or on public holidays”.

Therefore, in accordance with the sixth point of the annex of the RDL nº 10/2020 (which regulates the non-application of the paid leaves regulated in the present Royal Decree-Law) the port services are considered essential services (art. 18 of the Royal Decree, of March 14th), being some of them even mandatory for the vessels when in ports. Moreover, we must understand that all the State Ports of General Interest are strategic infrastructures by their very definition, some of them also being critical infrastructures. All of them are guarantors of operation of services that are defined as essential and must therefore continue to operate, guaranteeing supply by facilitating the flow of goods in them. 

The same interpretation shall be applicable to the companies that provide their services there: 

 – The commercial procurement service.

– The commercial supply service.

– The ship agency service.

– The commercial inter-port transport service.

– Port handling operations (dockers, etc.).

– The port passenger service.

– Mooring and unmooring service.

– The port towing service.

– The port consignment service.

– General services provided directly by the Port Authority or indirectly by third parties.

– The rest of the commercial activities related to the port activities, such as freight forwarders, customs agents, damage commissioners, container depots, etc.

With regard to road transport of goods, it is also asserted as essential and its workers can continue with their activity under the new exceptions to the compliance with driving and rest times implemented between March 29th and April 12th, both inclusive (Resolution of March 26th, 2020, of the Directorate General for Land Transport), and with the acceleration of driving facilitated by the so called cross-border “green lanes”. 

We should point out that transport activities remain fully operative as long as these are related to other essential economic activities (distribution of food and healthcare products, among others). What is more, the RLD n. 10/2020 is only applicable to the salaried employees, which means that the self-employed remain active except for those performing services for companies that were, on March 14th, classifies as no-essential and remain closed: restaurants and hospitality companies, sports companies, among others. 

Extension of the State of Alarm in Spain

The Congress of Deputies, at the plenary session on March 25, approved the extension of the State of Alarm for another 15 days, among other things. 

This means that all the measures, orders and decisions that have been implemented up to now and have been extended during the period of the State of Alarm shall be extended, a priori, for another 15 calendar days. In other words, the State of Alarm declared by the Royal Decree 463/2020 of 14th of March will last at least until midnight on April 11.

In fact, article 116 of the Spanish Constitution regulates the State of Alarm and establishes that it may be adopted by the Government for a maximum period of 15 calendar days. Yet it is precisely the article 116 of the Spanish Constitution that, in spite of limiting the action of the Government to declare the State of Alarm for a total period of 15 calendar days, in its second paragraph adds the possibility that the Congress of Deputies may extend such period, with unspecified time limitation. 

That is, as long as the Congress of Deputies approves the extension of the period of the State of Alarm the Constitution does not limit the duration of the period. Therefore, this could be prolonged if necessary.

Last measures adopted by the Spanish Government are:

LAND BORDER.- 

As we have already mentioned, the logical and direct consequence of the extension of the State of Alarm is that many of the Orders and Decisions that had been taken during the first two weeks of the State of Alarm shall also be extended during this second fortnight.

An example of this is the Order INT/283/2020, of 25 March, extending internal land border controls from 00:00 on 27 March 2020 to 24:00 on 11 April 2020. In other words, only the following persons will be allowed to enter the national territory by land: 

(a) Spanish citizens. 

(b) Residents of Spain. 

(c) Residents of other Member States or Schengen Associated States on their way to their place of residence.

(d) Cross-border workers. 

(e) Health or elderly care professionals on their way to work. 

(f) Those that provide documentary evidence of force majeure or necessity.

Exempt from these restrictions are foreign personnel accredited as members of diplomatic missions, consular offices and international organisations located in Spain, provided that they are travelling in connection with the performance of their official duties. Similarly, and in order to ensure the continuity of economic activity and to preserve the supply chain, these measures are not applicable to the transport of goods.

Another example is Order TMA/286/2020, of 25 March, which extends the ban on entry of passenger ships from the Italian Republic and cruise ships of any origin, on Spanish ports to limit the spread of COVID-19, from 00:00 hours on 27 March 2020 to 23:59 hours on 9 April 2020.

WORK.- 

At the same plenary meeting the Council of Deputies ratified the Royal Decree-Law, by means of which the objective dismissal for absenteeism was repealed (article 52.d of the Workers’ Statutes), which allowed dismissal for justified medical absences.

The main objective of the Minister of Health with the repeal of this article is to preserve the health of the workers, avoiding that they attend work while sick as they fear to be dismissed. Moreover, the Minister stresses that taking care of oneself, in addition to personal well-being, also guarantees the health of others. 

LAND TRANSPORT.- 

On the other hand, and in relation to the transport sector, on March 26th the Government enacted the Ministerial Order INT/284/2020 modifying the regulation that had been adopted during the State of Alarm for the management of traffic and circulation of motor vehicles. 

Article 1.1 states that the Minister of the Interior may agree to close to traffic roads or sections of roads for reasons of public health, safety or traffic flow, or to restrict access to certain vehicles on these roads for the same reasons. Furthermore, the paragraph 2 provides that, in the case of road closures or restrictions on the movement of certain vehicles, those intended for certain activities considered essential to ensure the supply of products and the provision of essential services to the population shall be exempted.

In particular, the vehicles considered essential to ensure the supply of essential goods and services are the following: 

a) Those of transport and health care, both public and private; those of the Security Forces and Corps, those of civil protection and rescue and those of fire extinction. 

b) Those transporting maintenance personnel or repair technicians for health facilities or equipment 

c) Those for the distribution of medicines and medical equipment. 

d) Those for the distribution of food. 

e) Those of the Armed Forces. 

f) Those for road assistance. 

g) Those of the road maintenance and conservation services. 

h) Those for the collection of solid urban waste. 

i) Those intended for the transport of melting materials. 

j) Those intended for the transport of fuels. 

k) Those intended for the production, marketing, processing and distribution of agricultural, livestock and fisheries products and their inputs; for the production, distribution, rental and repair of equipment and machinery for agriculture, fisheries, livestock farming and their associated industry, and for the transport and treatment of agricultural, livestock and fisheries waste and by-products and those of the food industry. 

l) Those intended for the carriage of perishable goods, understood as those set out in Annex 3 to the International Agreement on the Carriage of Perishable Foodstuffs (ATP) as well as fresh fruit and vegetables, in vehicles which meet the definitions and standards expressed in Annex 1 to the ATP. In any case, perishable goods must account for at least half the payload capacity of the vehicle or occupy half the payload volume of the vehicle. 

m) Those intended for the manufacture and distribution of cleaning and hygiene products. 

n) Those of the Sociedad Estatal Correos y Telégrafos, S.A. 

ñ) Funeral services. 

o) Those used by private security companies for the provision of security transport services, response to alarms, patrols or discontinuous surveillance, and those that are necessary for the performance of security services to guarantee essential services and supply the population.

p) Other vehicles that, if not included among the above, the agents in charge of traffic control and discipline consider, in each specific case, that they contribute to guaranteeing the supply of goods or the provision of essential services to the population.

Therefore, the circulation of these vehicles will be guaranteed during the entire State of Alarm, without limitation to restrictions, both existing and future.

INCOTERMS® 2020

What are Incoterms®?

The increase in the volume and complexity of the sales of national and international merchandise has generated a growth in the misunderstandings and litigation that can always arise between the parts of a contract; with greater reason when the two main parts of a contract, seller and buyer, are located in different countries. 

Already in 1936, and in order to facilitate international trade, Incoterms® were born from the hand of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC). Rules that, applied to a contract of sale, help to define the obligations and responsibilities that each of the parties assumes in the business they jointly undertake. So, the Incoterms® are not a supranational legal rule, but Lex Mercatoria.

When choosing a rule adjusted to our business needs, there are many more aspects that we should take into account. 

Among others:

  • The means of transport to be used to send the goods from the seller’s premises to those of the buyer.
  • The nature of the merchandise that is the object of the sale, as it is not the same, if we have to urgently deliver perishable merchandise, send bulk merchandise on ships or carry out a palletized truck transport, among other cases.
  • The means of payment agreed between the parties. In this case, the situation will be conditioned on having to make the payment by means of documentary credit with banking entities.
  • The buyer’s own wishes. In fact, there is more and more competition between companies so, in many cases, the seller is forced to make the difference from their competitors.
  • The situation of the countries of origin and destination of the merchandise, since it may happen that we are facing countries with protectionist tariff policies or unstable legal situations or policies.

 

Incoterms® 2020

This year the last version of these rules has been finalized, which is born under the name “Incoterms® 2020” and will enter into force on January 1, 2020.

The rules are classified in the different groups that we detail below:

GROUP

INCOTERM®

DESCRIPTION

Group EEXWEx Works.
Group FFCAFree Carrier
FASFree Alongshide Ship
FOBFree on Board
Group CCFRCost and Freight
CIFCost, Insurance and Freight
CPTCarriage Paid to
CIPCarriage and Insurance paid to 
Group DDPUDelivery at Place Unloaded
DAPDelivery at place
DDPDelivery Duty Paid 

 

Among the novelties presented by this new version, the first and probably most striking is the redenomination of the rule DAT (Delivered At Terminal) that now happens to be called DPU (Delivered at Place Unloaded). This change of acronyms is a simple redenomination, since the obligations and functions of both terms remain exactly the same.

The term DPU is classified within the group of multipurpose terms, meaning that it is an Incoterm® suitable for any type of contracted transport (Road, road, air or sea transport), and is the only Incoterm® that provides that the delivery will only be carry out once the merchandise has been unloaded from the means of transport in which it has been transported. The new nomenclature that has been given to this term only evidences the fact that the merchandise will be delivered unloaded, unlike the rest of the Incoterms® in which the merchandise will be made available to the buyer at the port of destination , in the place designated by the parties.

Secondly, we must mention that in this new version of the Incoterms® when applying the Rule FCA (Free Carrier), it gives us the option, only in case that the main international transport contracted is maritime transport, that the buyer request the carrier or maritime carrier to issue a Bill of Lading on behalf of the seller, wherein the clause “on board” is included, which will record that the merchandise has been loaded on board the ship. 

The introduction of this clause in the Bill of Lading or Bill of Lading will facilitate the payment made by means of documentary credit, as mentioned above.

Thirdly, in this new version it is explained precisely which party will be responsible for carrying out customs procedures, assuming the costs and risks of that phase. The responsibility will be assumed by those who are obliged to transport the goods to the designated place of delivery. Also, for the first time, the dispatch of goods in transit is included.

Finally, we want to talk about what we consider to be the most important difference that this new version of the Incoterms® 2020 rules has brought. This are the different coverages for the merchandise insurance, during their international transport under the terms CIP (Carriage and Insurance Paid to) and CIF (Cost, Insurance and Freight).

While in the CIF term the seller will contract in favor of the buyer a transport insurance with a minimum coverage of clause C of the English Institute Cargo Clauses, which does not vary from the previous Incoterms® version 2010, in the CIP term, the seller will contract for the buyer the transport insurance with a maximum coverage according to clause A of the English Institute Cargo Clauses. 

Difference between CIP and CIF that is justified because CIF is commonly used for the maritime transport of bulk goods (raw materials, scrap, minerals, etc.) whose price per kilo is very low. Therefore, if insurance with maximum coverage is demanded, the policy would become more expensive, which would damage the negotiation margin of the sellers with their potential buyers.

In any case, we must not forget that the rules are part of the ancestral business of buying and selling merchandise, and will be subject to the modifications that the parties consider appropriate and determined in their contracts, within the freedom that national and international trade and rules grant them.  

Royal Decree 596/2019 of 18th October on security and safety regulations applicable to the passenger vessels operating between Spanish ports.

On 21st December 2019, the Royal Decree 596/2019 of 18th October on security and safety regulations applicable to the passenger vessels operating between Spanish ports, which amends the Royal Decree 1247/1999 of 16th July, comes into force. 

This new Royal Decree seeks to take into consideration the combination of security measures that are required and the real conditions on board of the ships, without eluding matters such as crew training and preparation and their working conditions. 

The issuance of this new Royal Decree 596/2019 is motivated by the necessity to adjust the Spanish legislation to the existing European regulations, and the amendments mainly focus on maritime safety and security. For that, the Royal Decree amends primarily the wording of the articles that constitute it, but on a larger scale it modifies the articles 2, 3, 4, 6 and 13.   

In particular, the article 2, as we can observe, adds several new exclusions, such as vessels and sailing boats, offshore service vessels or support vessels and high-speed passenger boats when used exclusively in port areas. 

Regarding the article 3, this has been greatly amended since refences to the safety has been added by referring to the International Code on Intact Stability, 2008 (MSC 267 (85) IMO). In the same way it updates the regulation by amending the former Law 27/1992 by the current Royal Decree 2/2011, Consolidated Text of the State Ports and Marchant Navy Act. 

Its article 4, which concerns the classification of sea areas, has been amended completely. The definitions of sea areas have been simplified and, whereas in the previous classification the priorities were given to the areas where passenger vessels were operating, the current classification mentions simply sea areas and the point 3 of this article is exclusively devoted to the passenger vessels and their classification depending on the sea area where they can navigate.  

An additional paragraph has been included into the article 6, which regards significant repair works, changes and modifications performed on new vessels as well as on those already existing.  

Finally, it is worth mentioning that the wording of the articles 12 and 13 has also been amended in order to adjust them to the current international regulation. 

As we can see, legislation is a constantly progressing science that needs to be adapted to the new realities. It is evident that the reality of the sector in the matter of security applicable to passenger vessels in 1999 and the current reality are far from being even similar. Since there is a strong need for it, we do not doubt that the current reform will be welcomed.    

The responsibility of the Logistics Operator

Port operations of goods during its permanence in a port are of utmost importance for the correct development of the subsequent maritime transportation. Indeed, this is one of the most dangerous and sensitive phases for the goods throughout which it might suffer considerable damages if the operations are not performed appropriately and by qualified professionals. 

Attention is particularly drawn to the fact that there had been a poor regulation of this stage of transportation before the new Spanish Shipping Act came into force in 2014. This law, beside considering the common figures of navigation such as shipowners or shippers, also regulates other figures as harbor pilots and port operators. This last figure will be addressed in this article. 

The port operator frequently encompasses diverse nomenclatures (loader, stevedore, etc.) and the fact is that none of them covers in its description all operations that are effectively handled by port operators. In particular, the Spanish Shipping Act in its article 330 regards the operations that are handled by port operators such as: “the operations of loading, unloading, stevedoring activities on board the vessels, as well as those of reception, classification, depositing and storage in docks or harbor warehouses, and those of inter-port transportation”. 

Regarding the Port Handling Contract regulation, this has been constituted by very different norms throughout a very extensive timespan. In fact, the first legal text which attempts to regulate the Port Handling Contract at the level of international regulation is the United Nations Convention on the Liability of Operators of Transport Terminals in International Trade. This Convention provides, in a broad sense, the basis which the subsequent regulation would apply to develop legislation in this field of logistics.    

At national level, this concept was firstly regulated by the Spanish State Ports and Merchant Marine Act, developed currently under the Title VI – Provision of Services, as well as later in the Spanish Shipping Act, norm that regulates the figure of port operator from the article 329 onwards to the article 338. Articles which we strongly recommend reading.  

The mayor problem that might appear is that the law indicates that the Port Operator’s liability is based on the presumption of liability iuris tantum; that is,  there is a reversal of the burden of proof and it is assumed that the Port Operator is liable for possible damages to the goods unless the contrary is proved, as long as there is a protest (remark) of the receiver at the moment of delivery. Therefore, the moment of delivery of the goods and the possible remarks that the receipt which proves the delivery may or may not contain, is a good form of demonstrating whether the goods arrived already damaged from the point of departure or that, if damaged, these might have occurred in a previous stage of the transportation or handling and lashing of the goods.  

In fact, there are several parties which might request port operator’s liability. The principal one, obviously, is the party contracting the services; but there are other parties, as for instance the consignee of the goods, who might initiate a direct action against the port operator even though he did not contract him. 

It is thus evident that port operators will be held liable for damages to cargo and the only exceptions that the norm anticipates are those of force majeure or fortuitous cases, assessing always if all possible means to avert damages or delays have been deployed by the involved professionals. Consequently, in order to be exempt from liability, not only should be there any of the grounds for exception (force majeure or fortuitous case) but the port operator also has to prove that he tried to minimize, by any available means, the damages or delays. 

With regard to possible limitations, the Spanish Shipping Act regulates the limitation of liability for port operators in the articles 334 and 335 placing it at 2DEG/kg (Derecho Especial de Giro), 2,45 Euros/kg approximately. We understand that the legislator decides to apply this specific limitation to preserve a certain kind of agreement with the existing international rules related to Maritime Transport. In fact, the norm establishes that port operators should be granted the same exceptions as those provided for in the Hague-Visby Rules for carriers, with nuances developed in the article 334 of the Spanish Shipping Act.  

Therefore, when port operators receive the goods, they should check its state and issue a receipt, or a proof of delivery, noting down its state when deposited and indicating whether they observe any damage or not. The problem is, however, that the issuance of such receipts, despite its importance, is not a common praxis since it is the port operator who will have to prove that the goods were already damaged when they were delivered, if that was the case. 

The receiver of the goods, on his part, has the obligation to place a claim within 3 and 15 working days, depending on if these damages are visible to the naked eye or not. Once this period is over, the law presumes that the goods were delivered in perfect conditions.  

On the other hand, and in relation to the limitation period to institute proceedings against the Port Operator, as in other cases, it is not unlimited in time. The regulation seeks to avoid passivity and lack of interest of the parties, so it restricts the limit of the actions to be taken against port operators to two (2) years. In particular, the Article 337 of the Spanish Shipping Act, initiates the time period of two years in the moment of delivery of the goods by the responsible operator, or in the event of total loss on the scheduled delivery date: “Claims for damages, loss, or delays in delivery of the goods prescribe two years after their delivery by the responsible operator. In the event of total loss, the time limit shall be counted from the date on which the goods should have been delivered”.     

An interesting point of the article in comparison to international regulations is that it speaks about limitation period and not about non-interruptible time limit. The non-interruptible time limit cannot be interrupted whereas the limitation period can, providing thus for the possibility to extend the period of two years by means of the relevant interruption. 

In short, the figure of Port Operator is susceptible to claims for damages or delays in a transportation phase throughout which the goods might be exposed to high-risk situations. We therefore suggest always paying special attention to the moment of delivery of the goods granting thus an appropriate backing in case the cargo did not arrive in the expected conditions, as well as to the time limits when the damages could have occurred in order to be able to claim or reject claims, depending on who the affected party is.        

 

Cyber disruption in marine

Yesterday, one of our partners, Verónica Meana, took part in a practical conference organized by AON under the title “CYBER DISRUPTION IN MARINE” which was held in AON’s head office in Torre de Iberdrola in Bilbao. The conference was devoted to learning about and to sharing the risks and consequences that cyberattacks constitute in transportation and industry. 

Verónica had the opportunity to share the discussion panel with Max Bobys, Chris Bhatt and Nannette Wong, and in her presentation tackled administrative and civil responsibilities within transportation and logistics in the context of cyber threat, referring in particular to the maritime transportation sector and its agents. 

AIYON Abogados would like to thank AON for the opportunity we were given to participate in this event, which was greatly insightful in terms of better understanding of the new and future risks that the transportation sector is facing, the ways to deal with them and the insurance options available in the market of hull and machinery, civil liability and P&I insurance. 

Read article published…

PIRACY, A REALITY IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY

Piracy in the maritime world is a reality with a history of hundreds of years, being sometimes prosecuted and other times protected by the institutions of the countries present in the different maritime areas around the world. We have been currently witnessing the fact that this phenomenon is still alive and that it is a way of extorting not only companies and individuals, but also governments of those countries that have to address these unlawful actions in the most thorough manner taking always into consideration the vessels’ safety, but above all the welfare of their crews.

Focusing on our own most recent experience, we know that there have been several pirate attacks in waters of the Indian Ocean against Basque fishing vessels, in particular the “Txori Argi” and the “Haizea Lau”, which only demonstrates that, while the pirate attacks at sea do not attract the spotlight of the news worldwide as they used to some years ago, piracy is by no means eradicated. In fact, and talking here on global scale, the incidents associated with this phenomenon far from being diminishing on the contrary have been increasing according to the report of International Maritime Bureau (ICC) which signals that there were 201 incidents of maritime piracy recorded during 2018 compared with the 180 incidents recorded the year before.

These incidents experienced last year, hijackings and kidnappings committed by pirates, whose target were not only cargo and container vessels, including the vessels of the UN organization involved in international aid programs for countries in specific critical situation, but also, to a larger extent, fishing vessels.

Piracy actions that have been recently concentrated on a mayor scale in waters of the Gulf of Guinea, an area that seems to have taken over what happened in the previous years on the Somalia coastline as the recorded incidents dabbled there in 2018 compared with the year before. In fact, waters of Somalia are enjoying a “relative peace”, at least in comparison with the situation in previous years, basically due to two circumstances. On the one hand, the massive deployment of the so-called “Operation Atalanta”, in which Spain is an active participant, and whose main objective is to protect the maritime traffic in the Indian Ocean against the acts of piracy  and, on the other hand, due to the own security measures taken by the vessels, such as the established operating procedures in case of a piracy attack and the presence of private security companies on board. Yet, the navigation close to the Somalian coastline still requires extreme caution on the part of the shipowners and their crews, as demonstrated by what happened with the fishing vessels “Txori Argi” and “Haizea Lau” this year, and which prevents us from excluding Somalia from the areas of risk.

If we look to the future, we can foresee that piracy, as we know it today, will gradually disappear as the navigation of autonomous vessels and vessels piloted by a remote control from a ground base (unmanned vessels) will become a reality on our seas and oceans, developing thus a new way of maritime navigation.

If we focus on this hypothetical scenario, it might be concluded that new cyber pirates could operate from any place around the globe without any need to be on-site and even without need to be a member of an organization, so that military deployments and private security companies on board, which are nowadays common means of deterrence and protection, could not be used as the main guarantors of a nonviolent navigation. The fight against piracy, which will, one way or another, continue being a present and future threat, will have to be adjusted to the scenarios that may evolve, as well as it should be the legal systems of the countries affected by this reality.

Accordingly, it should be noted that if the control system of an unmanned vessel were intercepted from distance by means of technology and for illicit purposes, it is certain that such situation would not fit in with the provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Montego Bay) related to piracy, since the convention specifies that such acts should be committed through the intervention of the crew or the passengers of a vessel and directed against another vessel. Furthermore, if we examine the crime of piracy after the amendment introduced by the Organic Law 15/2003 of 25th November, the current Criminal Code requires that a seizure of a vessel be preceded by an act o violence, intimidation or deceit and therefore the above mentioned situation (with no violence, intimidation or deceit due to the use of virtual means) would remain, at least at the beginning, out of the current criminal penalization.

To sum up, in accordance with the current regulation, it could be concluded that the possible future acts of piracy that were mentioned above would not be considered but cyberattacks with the application of the provisions for cybercrime and other common criminal definitions provided for in the Criminal Code in accordance with the particular circumstances of each case (misappropriation, damages, etc.). This is, however, insufficient since the future acts of piracy might involve, beside a cyberattack for specific purposes, an offence against the safety at the sea and navigation, a legal interest that the crime of piracy aims to protect.

Thus, we find it necessary to review the concept of piracy, so that it encompasses other scenarios that are currently not covered, such as cyberattacks against unmanned vessels, and that these cases remain not restricted to the category of computer specific crime and other offences. We, from our law firm as a team of professionals of the sector and due to our experience, consider that it is convenient, from now on, to be aware of the new forms of piracy, which might already be a reality, and hence to adjust the regulation and the strategies to be followed without delay in order to stay ahead and protect adequately vessels and their crews.

Read article published…

WISTA Spain Annual Meeting – 2019 – “Bilbao in Evolution”

On 26th and 27th of April, WISTA Spain annual meeting was held in the Maritime Museum (Museo Marítimo) in Bilbao and was cosponsored by our firm. The event was organized by the WISTA associates in Bilbao, Marta Prado, the chair of the panel discussion on 26th; Itsaso Ibáñez, Carolina Ibáñez and the partner of our Bilbao office, Zuberoa Elorriaga.

As planned, the event under the title Bilbao in Evolution: New Trends in Shipping and Tradingtook place on Friday. The meeting was divided into three thematic groups, two in the morning with various presentations under the heading “Fishing Industry, Insurance and its Evolution” and “Logistics, Transportation and Supply Chain”; and one in the afternoon consisting of a very interactive panel discussion called “Development and Port Challenges in the XXIst Century”, all this with the participation and the great performance of Dr. Olga Fotinopoulos – Full Professor of Laboru Law and Social Welfare Law at the University of the Basque Country, Mr. Borja Alonso Olano – Director of the Legal and Sustainability Department of Albacora S.A., Mrs. Beate Soia – Account Executive of March JLT, Marine Insurance & Claims, Mrs. Iratxe García Gil – Director of Organization and Corporate Development in IVL/LEE (Basque Institute of Mobility and Sustainability), Mrs. Sonia García Díaz – Managing Director in Dagase, President of Asetravi ( Business Association of Transport of Biscay), Mrs. Nerea García Núñez – Regional Supply Chain Manager in Guardian Glass Automotive – Europe, Mrs. Inmaculada Ugarteche Maturana – Director of UniportBilbao – Port Community, Mrs. Elvira Gallego Uribe – General Manager in CPS Iberian Bilbao Terminal, Mrs. Ana Santiago G-Bretón – CEO in SISTEPLANT and Mrs. Sira Aranguren Lozano – Managing Director in SERGUSA and President of the Official Association of the Customs Agents in Bilbao.

Out of the present authorities it is necessary to stress the support received from Mrs. Arantxa Tapia, Minister for Economic Development and Competitiveness of the Basque Government, who also participated in the event, as well as the attendance of the Director of the Merchant Navy, Mr. Benito Núñez, the Harbour Master of Bilbao Mr. Carlos García, the Harbour Master of Pasaia Mr. Josu Gotzon Bilbao and Mr. Carlos Alzaga of the Bilbao Port Authority, among others.

From AIYON Abogados we would like to congratulate all the organizers and speakers on the excellent work done!

Read article published…

Royal Decree 257/2019, of April 12th – Rules Governing the Granting of Special Aids for the Adaptation of Port Stevedoring Services

In our article dated May 29th 2017 and entitled “Stevedore Service Regulation Eventually Settled in Spain”, we already mentioned the regulation enacted in the Royal Decree-Act 8/2017, of May 12th , which modifies the regulation of workers that provide port cargo handling services, which has been recently supplemented by the Royal Decree – Act 9/2019, of March 29th, which modifies the Act 14/1994, of June 1st, by means of which temporary employment agencies are governed, so that these can adapt to the requirements of the port stevedoring services.

Now, by means of the Royal Decree 257/2019 of April 12th, after intense negotiations between the Government and the affected parties, and in the pursuit of a mediation focused on stabilizing the employment in the sector and on increasing productivity in general, it has been decided to develop an aid plan for those older workers who request voluntary termination of their employment contract with the pertinent Stevedoring Collectives (the so-called “SAGEPs”) or with the company licensed for port cargo handling services or with the Port Employment Centre where they have been employed, provided, of course, that they comply with the requirements established in the this Royal Decree. The nature and the application and payment terms of these aids are specified in the articles 2 to 13 of this RD.

Moreover, the present regulation establishes a transitional period of adaptation for the workers of the “SAGEPs”, derogates the Order FOM 2297/2013 of October 23rd which determines the required vocational training qualification, as well as any provisions of equal or lower rank that oppose the provisions of this RD, and modifies and updates certain certificates of professional competence related to cargo operations and stevedoring.

This Royal Decree will enter into force the day after its publication in the Official State Gazette (BOE), except for the regulation on processing and granting of aids, which will enter into force two months after the date of its publication.