For a long period of time, EU policy regarding petroleum pollution was based on supporting projects undertaken on the international forum and to encourage member states to ratify conventions put forward by the International Maritime Organization (IMO). The catastrophe of the tanker Erika, which was sailing under the Maltese flag, indicated that these measures were insufficient. On March 21, 2000, the European Commission introduced a set of legal proposals that was known commonly as the ERIKA I packet. These regulations came into force in June 2003. The European Commission introduced the ERIKA II packet in December 2000, but it met with only partial approval from member states. In accordance with earlier announcements, the ERIKA III packet was introduced on November 23, 2005. This is the subsequent step in creating “a defense mechanism to defend Europe from accidents at sea and from environmental pollution". None of seven proposals has yet to be accepted. The three ERIKA packages comprise a multifaceted response from the EU regarding the growing threat of petroleum pollution.

Punitive damages is a quasi-punishment that aims at prevention. It is not known under European law. They are awarded in exceptional circumstances. Its purpose is to punish the perpetrator of an insidious and intentional illegal action. The author describes the story of the tanker Exxon Valdez, which struck rocks off the coast of Alaska on 23 March 1989. The captain Joseph Hazelwood was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the accident. Because of the resultant pollution thousands offishermen applied for compensation, as did the owners of businesses connected with the maritime environment and of shoreline real estate. Exxon Shipping reached many settlements with plaintiffs, but thirtytwo thousand fishermen and owners of shoreline property rejected settlements, and sued Exxon demanding indemnity and the imposition of punitive damages. On 16 September 1994 a jury imposed punitive damages to the sum five thousand million dollars along with an indemnity of 507.5 million dollars. On appeal the quasi punishment was reduced to 4.5 thousand million dollars. The Appeal Court fixed punitive damages at 2.5 thousand million dollars. Both sides appealed to the US Supreme Court. The Supreme Court considered whether the punitive damages imposed on Exxon were consistent with the principles of maritime law. On 25 June 2008 it finally determined that in cases similar to that of Exxon Shipping the relation of punitive damages to indemnity should be 1:1, and reduced 2.5 thousand million dollars to 507.5 million dollars, which was the indemnity awarded to the plaintiffs.