This case arose from a major oil spill involving the Liberian-flagged tanker Symphony. On 14 April 2021, Symphony Shipholding SA (Symphony), the owner of the Symphony, entered into a Ship Pollution Response Agreement (the Agreement) with Qingdao Ronghai Ocean Environmental Protection Service Co Ltd (Ronghai). The agreement used a standard form provided by the Chinese maritime authority. Ronghai agreed to carry out pollution control and clean-up operations, and Symphony agreed to pay the relevant costs at the agreed rates. North of England P&I Designated Activity Company (North of England) was the oil pollution liability insurer of the Symphony.

On 27 April 2021, the Symphony collided with the Panamanian general cargo vessel Yi Hai in waters south of Chaolian Island, Qingdao. About 9,400 mt of cargo oil leaked into the sea and caused pollution. At Symphony's request, Ronghai deployed vessels and personnel to carry out pollution control and clean-up operations. On 18 August 2021, the Qingdao Maritime Court allowed North of England to establish an oil pollution liability limitation fund for Symphony. Ronghai registered its clean-up claim against the fund.

On 30 September 2021, Ronghai brought proceedings in the Qingdao Maritime Court. It claimed payment of all clean-up costs under the Agreement, and argued that those costs should not be subject to the limitation fund. Symphony and North of England disputed the legal nature of the Agreement, Ronghai's right to claim, and whether the clean-up costs were subject to limitation.

Held: Claim allowed in part.

The Qingdao Maritime Court held that the case involved foreign elements. China is a State Party to the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage 1992 (the CLC 1992). The oil spilled in the accident was persistent hydrocarbon mineral oil within art 1.5 of the Convention.The CLC 1992 therefore applied in priority, while Chinese law applied to matters not governed by the Convention.

The Court held that the Agreement was a civil contract. Although it was entered into under Chinese marine environmental protection requirements, and used a standard form provided by the maritime authority, the parties were free to agree most of its terms, including the payment. Ronghai's pollution control and clean-up operations were therefore civil acts, and Ronghai was entitled to claim the relevant costs from Symphony.

Article 3.1 of the CLC 1992 provides that the owner of a ship at the time of an incident is liable for pollution damage caused by oil escaping or being discharged from the ship. The oil spill resulted from a collision in which both the Symphony and the Yi Hai were at fault. Symphony, as the owner of the polluting vessel, was therefore liable for the resulting pollution damage.

The Court further held that Ronghai's clean-up costs were reasonably incurred to prevent or minimise pollution damage. They therefore constituted 'pollution damage' within art 1.6 of the CLC 1992.

As to limitation of liability, the Court held that Symphony was entitled under art 5.1 of the CLC 1992 to limit its liability for the clean-up costs. North of England, as the oil pollution liability insurer of Symphony, was also liable for the pollution damage, subject to the applicable limitation fund.

The Court finally held that Ronghai had a maritime claim of RMB 42,987,210, together with interest on the clean-up costs, against Symphony and North of England. The claim was to be satisfied from the oil pollution liability limitation fund established for Symphony. Ronghai's remaining claims were dismissed.