In recent years the Commission of the European Union has endeavored to create a regional European system of transport law, one that would not affect unimodal transport contracts and their respective conventions. The key issue therefore is relationship between such system and those conventions and, ultimately, the Rotterdam Rules. In its Resolution of 5 May 2010 on strategic goals and recommendations for the EU’s maritime transport policy until 2018 (2009/2095 (INI)), The European Parliament calls for speedy signing, ratification an implementation of the Rotterdam Rules by the EU member states.

The opponents of the Rotterdam Rules point to their conflict with unimodal transport conventions. However, the new system devised in that Convention allows for co-existence of unimodal systems while providing a sound replace-ment of outdated maritime regulations.

The international community is presently facing a new hazard in the form of oil spills from drilling platforms rather than ships. The issue was first brought to public attention in conjunction with the 2009 West Atlas rig fire that resulted in oil pollution of Indonesia and northern shores of Australia. The wrangle continues in the wake of the recent Deepwater Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico.

As of today there are no international measures that regulate the issues of civil liability for offshore drilling related pollution. Indonesia has put forward the matter to the International Maritime Organisation; the IMO intends to draft a convention.

Civil liability for offshore drilling related pollution within domestic law is aseparate issue. In Polish law, Article 435 et seq of the Civil Code would apply. The pollution threat extends to the Baltic Sea, Northern Sea and other parts of the world.

The issue is also being examined by the European Union. The European Agency for the Maritime Safety has mandate to act in case of damage related to offshore drilling. Following the example of the American Oil Pollution Act (1990), the EU aims to draft comprehensive laws that would cover pollution associated with the entire mining industry.

The article discusses requirement for proof of insurance or other financial security, a subject that is known to international conventions, yet remains relatively novel in maritime law. Proof of insurance takes form in a certificate issued after a template set forth in a relevant convention. The International Maritime Organization works on a single model compulsory insurance certificate that would cover numerous conventions. The author, despite difficulties associated with the project, advocates single model certificates.

This article examines the meaning and evolution of the practical implementation of the ‘genuine link’ concept over the years since the rise of the flag-of-convenience (FOC) registries in the 1920s. The author notes that while the competition between Flag States become fiercer, the regulations on ship safety, pollution prevention or shipboard working and living conditions are becoming standardized and ubiquitous. By being regulated by international instruments, in effect restricting regulatory powers of Flag States. Likewise, the enforcement of these provisions is becoming internationalized – with the omnipresence of classification societies and introduction of PSC regimes. At the same time, author identifies a lack of adequate regulations in respect of employment of seafarers, most notably wages and social security contributions, both at the national (Flag State) and international level. This legal loophole encourages Port States to introduce local solutions, irrespective of Flag State regulations. Such developments weaken the ‘genuineness’ of the ‘genuine link’ between ship and its Flag State.