Turkey's salvage regime in the Straits and coastal waters creates a unique structure between the strategic geographical position and the monopoly rights of the public authority. At the 'Ship Insurance Turkey' symposium held today in Istanbul, the panel focused on mandatory intervention, tariff structures, ex officio salvage decisions, the Turkish standard form, and the position of insurers.

Moderated by Selçuk Esenyel, Founding Partner of Esenyel & Partners, the panel featured speakers including Çağlar Coşkunsu, Partner at Cavus & Coskunsu, Enam Hussain, Head of Middle East Operations and Offshore at West of England P&I Club, Bénédicte Plé, Head of Marine Damage at Willis Towers Watson, and Mats Fielding, Senior Claims Manager at Norwegian Hull Club.

A Salvage Regime Where Geography and Public Authority Intersect

Çağlar Coşkunsu described the salvage practice in Turkey as a unique regime where the uniqueness of geography intersects with the monopoly rights of the public authority. He emphasized that the vast majority of salvage incidents occur in the Turkish Straits, the Dardanelles, and coastal waters, where the administration's monopoly authority is decisive.

In addition to operations predominantly concentrated in the Straits and the Dardanelles, it was noted that escort services for tankers are also provided within this framework.

1994: A Turning Point for the Salvage System

Coşkunsu recalled that the transformation of Turkey's emergency intervention capacity began with the 1994 Nassia accident:

'1994 was a wake-up call for the administration. After that accident, significant investments were made in tugs and firefighting capacity. At that time, the inability to rescue the crew from fire and the environment was traumatic for all of us. Today, however, the firefighting capacity and response time in the Straits have dramatically decreased.'

Coşkunsu conveyed this point with a striking comparison: 'If I call an ambulance now, it takes a certain time to arrive. But if you need intervention in the Straits, the response time is sometimes measured in seconds. This is a great luxury — especially in serious cases that cause fire, collision, or loss of life.'

'A Luxury in Serious Cases, a Source of Debate in Simple Cases'

The most sensitive discussion of the panel focused on how this rapid intervention regime is applied in simple technical failures. Coşkunsu stated that the intervention of the public authority in serious cases is a significant gain; however, he questioned whether salvage intervention is genuinely necessary in situations like a machine failure that could be restored within 5-10 minutes or a temporary loss of speed due to local currents.

At this point, a critical provision of Turkish legislation was highlighted: the ex officio salvage decision. According to Coşkunsu:

'According to our legislation, the port authority can issue a salvage decision ex officio, even if the captain does not request assistance and even reasonably refuses it. This can sometimes lead to inconsistencies in the application of the law.'

Discussion on the Turkish Standard Form: 'Do Not Sign'

One of the most practical discussions of the panel revolved around the Turkish standard form that the public authority attempts to have shipowners sign.

Coşkunsu stated that the advice directed to shipowners is clear:

'Sometimes the administration can pressure to sign the Turkish standard form; we generally advise our clients in Austria and other jurisdictions not to sign it. However, this is a two-sided issue: Some captains hesitate to confront the administration and sign the form immediately.'

It was noted during the panel that the administration does not often exhibit an excessively coercive attitude regarding signing; however, due to monopoly rights, it can directly initiate salvage operations. Coşkunsu emphasized that the current arbitration clause is controversial and that the form is unfavorable to shipowners: 'We find the conditions of the signed form very unfavorable, especially concerning the arbitration clause.'

Insurer's Perspective: Security Issues

The most critical emphasis from the insurance side of the panel was on the challenges in the security process. According to the insurers' perspective, the way the administration structures its security demands and its inconsistency with international practices complicates the position of insurers.

Since decisions in salvage incidents must be made very quickly, the insurer's position requires special diligence. Bénédicte Plé listed the evaluation criteria from a P&I perspective:

- The safety of the crew,
- Responsibilities related to the cargo.

Plé emphasized that the environmental aspect is always on the agenda in salvage interventions and that the insurer evaluates the risk from this threefold perspective.

Proportionality Issue Between H&M and P&I

The most technically sensitive discussion of the panel was about how salvage costs are allocated between H&M (Hull & Machinery) and P&I policies. As highlighted by Mats Fielding from Norwegian Hull Club:

'The insurer only covers the proportional part of the salvage. Therefore, the shipowner may have to finance the disproportionate part themselves. The issue of disproportionality is the most critical matter at this point.'

This structure can create a significant financial burden, especially in cases where the shipowner experiences an imbalance between the cargo value and the vessel value.

The Role of Private Sector Salvors

The panel also revealed that the salvage market in Turkey is not solely comprised of the public authority. It was emphasized that private sector salvors have been carrying out significant work, especially recently.

As one of the speakers stated:

'Private salvors have been successfully assigned in projects where several different cases are managed simultaneously. Salvage is not just a cost item; it is also a strong capacity area that Turkey possesses alongside its private sector salvaging companies. Turkish salvors are in a safe and competent position.'

Practical Insurance Recommendations

The practical outcomes of the panel also included concrete recommendations:

- Early communication: It is critical for the insurer's side to be activated at the time of the incident.
- Documentation of the captain's position: The captain's will should be recorded in writing during the form signing processes.
- Evidence preservation: The most critical element in subsequent disputes.
- Appointment of a common lawyer for both the vessel and cargo sides: A model that can sometimes be implemented in practice in Turkey, enhancing coordination.

Conclusion: 'A Balance Between Monopoly Rights and the Insurer's Limits'

The panel highlighted that Turkey's salvage regime requires a unique balance between the monopoly rights of the public authority and international insurance practices. On one hand, the strong intervention capacity built after 1994 has transformed the Turkish Straits into some of the fastest responding waters in the world; on the other hand, the ex officio salvage authority, the Turkish standard form, and arbitration clauses continue to be topics that require constant oversight by shipowners and insurers in practice.

The common emphasis of the panelists was this: To derive the highest benefit from the salvage regime in Turkey, coordination must be established among shipowners, insurers, and lawyers from the very first minutes of the incident.

Source: SeaNews Türkiye