9.1 Principles governing rectification of deficiencies or detention of a ship

In taking a decision concerning the rectification of a deficiency or detention of a ship, the port State control officer will take into consideration the results of the detailed inspection carried out in accordance with section 3 of the Memorandum and the procedures mentioned in section 6 and in 9.3 of this Annex.

A combination of deficiencies of a less serious nature may also warrant the detention of the ship.

3.7.3 Where the ground for a detention is the result of accidental damage suffered on the ship's voyage to a port, no detention order will be issued, provided that:

3.12 Should any inspection referred to in 3.1 confirm or reveal deficiencies in relation to the requirements of a relevant instrument warranting the detention of a ship, all costs relating to the inspections in any normal accounting period will be covered by the shipowner or the operator or by his representative in the port State.

.4 Ships flying the flag of a State appearing in the three-year rolling average table of above-average detentions and delays published in the annual report of the MOU

3.13 The owner or the operator of a ship or his representative in the State concerned will have a right of appeal against a detention decision taken by the Authority of that State.

For this purpose appropriate action will be taken, which may include detention or a formal prohibition of a ship to continue an operation due to established deficiencies which, individually or together, would render the continued operation hazardous.

To assist the port State control officer in the use of these procedures there follows a list of deficiencies, grouped under relevant Conventions and/or Codes, which are considered of such a serious nature that they may warrant the detention of the ship involved.

3.8 Where deficiencies which caused a detention as referred to in 3.7.1 cannot be remedied in the port of inspection, the Authority may allow the ship concerned to proceed to the nearest appropriate repair yard available, as chosen by the master and the Authority, provided that the conditions determined by the competent authority of the flag State and agreed by the Authority are complied with.

3.2.4 In the case of deficiencies which are considered hazardous to safety, health or the environment the port State control officer will take such action, which may include detention as may be necessary, having regard to the factors mentioned in 3.2.1 of this Annex, to ensure that the deficiency is rectified or that the ship, if allowed to proceed to another port, does not present a clear hazard to safety, health or the environment.

The Authorities will take the measures necessary to ensure that all ships authorised to leave a port of their State under the circumstances referred to in 3.7.4.2 will be refused access to any port within the States, the Authorities of which are signatories to the Memorandum, except in the situations referred to in 3.9.3, until the owner or operator of the vessel has demonstrated, to the satisfaction of the Authority in whose State detention was ordered, that the ship has valid certificates issued in accordance with the ISM Code.

The owner or the operator of the ship or his representative in the Member State shall have a right of appeal against a detention decision taken by the competent authority.

Where the non-compliance is either a defective item of equipment or faulty documentation leading to the ship's detention and the non-compliance cannot be remedied in the port of inspection, the Contracting Government may allow the ship to sail to another port provided that any conditions agreed between the port States and the Administration or master are met.

CRITERIA FOR DETENTION OF A SHIP (as referred to in Article 9 (3))

In the case of deficiencies warranting the detention of a ship, the document to be given to the master in accordance with paragraph 1 shall include information about the future publication of the detention order in accordance with the provisions of this Directive.

'Where the ground for detention is the result of accidental damage suffered on the ship's voyage to a port, no detention order shall be issued, provided that:

Should the inspections referred to in Articles 6 and 7 confirm or reveal deficiencies in relation to the requirements of a Convention warranting the detention of a ship, all costs relating to the inspections in any normal accounting period shall be covered by the shipowner or the operator or by his representative in the port State.

'Detention' means the formal prohibition of a ship to proceed to sea due to established deficiencies which, individually or together, make the ship unseaworthy.

In the case of detention of a vessel for deficiencies or lack of valid certificates as laid down in Article 9 and Annex VI, all costs relating to the detention in port shall be borne by the owner or operator of the ship.";

No arrest or detention of the ship, even as a measure of investigation, shall be ordered by any authorities other than those of the flag State.

The owner or the operator of a ship or his representative in the Member State shall have a right of appeal against a detention decision taken by the competent authority.

Ships flying the flag of a State appearing in the three-year rolling average table of above-average detentions and delays published in the annual report of the MOU:ee-year rolling average table of above-average detentions and delays published in the annual report of the MOU:

Ships flying the flag of a State appearing in the three-year rolling average table of above-average detentions and delays published in the annual report of the MOU.

Council Directive 95/21/EC(5) establishes a system of port State control of shipping in the European Community based on uniform inspection and detention procedures.

any illegal acts of violence or detention, or any act of depredation, committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or a private aircraft, and directed:

The owner or the operator of a ship or his representative in the Member State shall have a right of appeal against a detention decision or refusal of access taken by the competent authority.

The refusal of access shall become applicable immediately the ship has been authorised to leave the port where it has been the subject of a second or third detention as appropriate.

To assist the inspector in the use of these guidelines, there follows a list of deficiencies, grouped under relevant conventions and/or codes, which are considered of such a serious nature that they may warrant the detention of the ship involved.

Whereas the casualty, detention and deficiency statistics published in the Commission's communication entitled 'A common policy on safe seas' and in the annual report of the MOU show that certain categories of ships need to be subject to an expanded inspection;

If this deficiency cannot be readily rectified in the port of detention, the competent authority may allow the ship to proceed to the nearest appropriate port where it shall be readily rectified or require that the deficiency is rectified within a maximum period of 30 days.

Where the non-compliance is either a defective item of equipment or faulty documentation leading to the ship's detention and the non-compliance cannot be remedied in the port of inspection, the Contracting Government may allow the ship to sail to another port provided that any conditions agreed between the port States and the Administration or master are met.

This concerns in particular information on the more extensive inspections performed on-board ships, both by the port State authorities and by the classification societies, and an explanation of the measures taken by the port State authorities or the classification societies concerned following a detention order under the Directive.

In view of the importance of such equipment for maritime safety and in parallel with the efforts being made on this subject within the IMO, it should be made mandatory after a period of up to five years after the entry into force of this Directive for cargo ships built before 1 July 2002 calling at Community ports and, when compulsory, its absence or failure should warrant detention.

Whereas, in its resolution of 8 June 1993 on a common policy on safe seas (4), the Council urged the Commission to submit as soon as possible to the Council suggestions for specific action and formal proposals concerning criteria for the inspection of ships, including the harmonization of detention rules, and including the possibility of publication of the results of the inspections and refusal of access to Community ports;

Member States shall take the measures necessary to ensure that all ships authorised to leave a port in a Member State under the circumstances referred to in paragraph 2 shall be refused access to all ports in the Community, except in the situations referred to in Article 11(6), until the owner or operator of the vessel has demonstrated, to the satisfaction of the competent authority of the Member State in which detention was ordered, that the ship has valid certificates issued in accordance with the ISM Code.