The rescue industry has changed a lot and there is rigorous competition between rescue companies. Currently, 5 to 6 global recovery operators dominate the scene. Improved technology and speed of communication are also beneficial for Salvors. When an accident is reported on the ship`s side, the main market participants receive tender notices almost simultaneously. Salvores find it more difficult to insist on the LOF and offer more flexible contractual conditions in smaller cases. PandaTip: The upper part of this model lists the fundamental details of the rescue contract, for example. B the contractor who is engaged, the place where the rescued objects are to be stored and the goods to be recovered. One of London`s maritime law firms has proposed what commentators will soon call « LOF light ». The LOF Light formulation automatically integrated SCOPIC and allowed parties to opt for services to be performed at the SCOPIC rate with an optional bonus. The bonus reflected the incentive factors listed in Article 13 of the 1989 Convention, such as skill, danger, safety value and length of service. The Salvors, through their association, the International Salvage Union (ISU), did not support the proposal. Shipowners do not assess the inclusion of the elements of Article 13 of the 1989 Rescue Convention, as they are not in a position to estimate their exposure or the total cost of the rescue operation. The uncertainty makes the proposal unattractive to shipowners.

The settlement of disputes is deferred at the same time as the assessment of the rescue price until the completion of the rescue mission. The parties can continue to work, surely knowing that there will be a fair and equitable conclusion at the end of the day. Lloyd`s Open Form, formally referred to as the Lloyd`s Standard Form of Salvage Agreement and commonly referred to as the LOF, is a standard contract for a planned rescue operation. The form dates from the late nineteenth century and is published by Lloyd`s of London and is the most widely used form for international rescue. [1] [2] Innovation in the LOF 1980 resulted in a major change in environmental rescue. There are some important differences between the above-mentioned treaties. With the exception of the Beijing form (CMAC 1994), « No Cure-No Pay » is the basic principle shared by national forms and the term is printed on the front of most documents. In practice, the MARSALV is usually signed after the completion of a successful rescue operation. This is explained by the fact that its conditions can hardly be agreed in advance, especially when the danger is acute. Unlike the LOF, the JSE 91 rewards the Salvor with the costs it incurred instead of the total value of the property saved.. . .