Yew Huoi, How & Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm

Menu

ADMIRALTY LAW– SIGNIFICANCE OF THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF THE SEA (UNCLOS)

UNCLOS (1982 Dec. 10) 1833 U.N.T.S. 397

Purpose of the UNCLOS and has it been ratified by Malaysia?
1. Establishing a legal order for the Seas and oceans with the aim of:
– Spurring international communication on maritime fronts between states.
– Promoting peaceful use of the seas and oceans.
– Conserving the living resources and the marine environment.

2. Malaysia ratified UNCLOS on the 14th of October 1996 as a state party Malaysia has always and continues to implement into practice various provisions under UNCLOS 1982.

What is the significance of UNCLOS 1982 in Malaysia?

  • Malaysia is strategically located between the South China Sea and the straits of Malacca and Singapore, it is one of the most important waterways connecting the Indian Ocean to the Pacific Ocean, the growing presence of the Straits in international trade poses evolving challenges. UNCLOS 1982 ensures the economic viability and sustainability of the ecosystem along the abovementioned shipping channels are preserved.

What are the measures under UNCLOS 1982 practiced by Malaysia?

  • Malaysia practices the Traffic Separation Scheme, prescribed under UNCLOS 1982 to ensure safe passage through the Straits, this eases international navigation for ships through the straits.
  • UNCLOS 1982 also provides cooperative arrangements between states as a method to strengthen communication.
  • The cooperation aids in the preservation of marine environment. For instance, states may establish requirements to reduce and control pollution to allow the entry of foreign vessels into their ports.
  • The mechanism also acts as a platform for companies and other stakeholders of the shipping industry to actively contribute towards efforts to maintain and improve safety of navigation and preservation of biodiversity in the shipping channels.

What are the current maritime co-operations pursued by Malaysia?

  • Malaysia promotes cooperation in maritime security through the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) through forums such as the ASEAN Maritime forum.
  • Malaysia alongside Indonesia, Singapore and Thailand formed the Malacca Straits Coordinated Patrols they pursue activities to maintain the security in the Straits of Malacca.
  • Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines share an avenue under the Trilateral Cooperative Arrangement with the aim of meeting common goals such as strengthening maritime security in the Sulu and Sulawesi Seas.
Back to Latest Legal Updates

Recent Post

FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN’S CUSTODY – CUSTODY DISPUTES IN MALAYSIA: ESSENTIAL INSIGHTS ON CHILD WELFARE AND PARENTAL ROLES

In a recent custody dispute, the court emphasized the importance of child welfare, reaffirming the maternal custody presumption for young children unless strong evidence suggests otherwise. In high-conflict situations, the court favored sole custody over joint arrangements to minimize stress on the children. This case underscores that Malaysian parents should provide credible evidence for their claims and focus on practical, child-centered solutions.

Read More »
31 10 月 ,2024 尚無留言

BREACH OF CONTRACT – DAMAGES – FORESEEABILITY AND FAIRNESS IN FREIGHT LIABILITY CLAIMS

In JSD Corporation v Tri-Line Express [2024] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 285, the court set a clear precedent on damages for property claims, ruling that only foreseeable and proportionate losses are recoverable. Applying principles akin to Hadley v Baxendale, the court allowed for repair costs if intent to remedy was evident but rejected double recovery, underscoring that damages must reflect actual loss without overcompensation. This decision serves as a guide for Malaysian courts, emphasizing fair and balanced recovery in line with foreseeable damages.

Read More »
31 10 月 ,2024 尚無留言

ADMIRALTY IN REM – SHIPPING — FUEL OR FREIGHT? COURT CLEARS THE AIR ON GLOBAL FALCON BUNKER DISPUTE

In a decisive ruling on the Global Falcon bunker dispute, the court dismissed Meck Petroleum’s admiralty claim for unpaid high-sulphur fuel, finding that the fuel was supplied not for operational purposes but as cargo. With the vessel lacking necessary equipment to use high-sulphur fuel and evidence pointing to its transfer to another vessel, the court determined that Meck’s claim fell outside admiralty jurisdiction, leading to the release of the vessel and potential damages for wrongful arrest.

Read More »
31 10 月 ,2024 尚無留言

COLLISION COURSE – COURT WEIGHS ANCHOR DRAGGING AND LIABILITY AT SEA

In a collision that underscores the high stakes of maritime vigilance, the court ruled that Belpareil bore the brunt of the blame for failing to control its dragging anchor and delaying critical warnings. Yet, Kiran Australia wasn’t off the hook entirely—apportioned 30% fault for its limited evasive action, the case serves as a stark reminder: in maritime law, all vessels share responsibility in averting disaster, even when one party’s errors loom large.

Read More »
31 10 月 ,2024 尚無留言

GENERAL AVERAGE – PIRATE RANSOM DISPUTE: SUPREME COURT RULES CARGO OWNERS LIABLE IN THE POLAR CASE

In the landmark case Herculito Maritime Ltd v Gunvor International BV (The Polar) [2024] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 85, the English Supreme Court upheld the shipowner’s right to recover a USD 7.7 million ransom paid to Somali pirates under general average. The Court ruled that cargo interests, despite their arguments regarding charterparty terms and insurance obligations, were liable to contribute to the ransom payment. This decision reinforces the importance of clear contractual provisions when seeking to limit or exclude liability in maritime contracts particularly matter relating to general average.

Read More »
31 10 月 ,2024 尚無留言
zh_TWZH
en_USEN ms_MYMY zh_TWZH
× 联系我们