The topic of Places of Refuge for ships in distress is not a new one. Indeed, this reviewer commented on Eric van Hooydonck’s Places of Refuge: International Law and the CMI Draft Convention in this Quarterly only recently: see [2011] 449. However, another author, Dr Anthony Morrison of the University of Wollongong has now offered a somewhat different perspective on this subject, and this new book is a welcome addition to the literature.

Professor Van Hooydonck provided a thorough overview of the subject and an extensive review of the work done by the CMI Working Group, of which he (and this reviewer) was a member. The CMI Working Group’s Report was considered by the Legal Committee of the IMO in 2009 but failed to attract sufficient support for the matter to be taken further. The fruits of this work have therefore been placed in suspense pending a revival of interest internationally. There is little doubt that only another marine casualty similar to those involving Erika, Castor and Prestige is likely to revive interest in the subject. This view is shared by Dr Morrison. It is a sobering thought that, despite the publicity generated by those three major casualties, the governments of coastal states have not been motivated to seek an international solution to the problems posed by ships in distress.

However, in this book Dr Morrison has sought to consider in greater depth the reasons for the lack of interest among the governments of coastal states in taking the matter further at this stage, and that is a welcome step forward. This book contains the fruits of Dr Morrison’s research, which led to the submission of his doctoral thesis in the Australian National Centre for Ocean Resources and Security at the University of Wollongong in New South Wales.

Dr Morrison’s book has the subtitle “Problems and Methods of Resolution” and he has worked assiduously through the reports of past casualties, and the debates in the CMI and IMO, in search of solutions. Unsurprisingly, he has not discovered a magic formula, but has identified a number of particular problems. He compares the attitude of the Shipping Industry Associations, and in particular the P&I Clubs who insure the risk of third-party claims arising from ships in distress, with the perspective of the port industry, well articulated by the International Association of Ports and Harbours (“IAPH”), which, while expressing willingness to work towards a common solution, seek a framework which offers them reasonable prospects of full compensation for the damage caused by such a casualty. The International Salvage Union (“ISU”) has been particularly vocal in pressing for a solution, citing (with some justification) the heavy costs borne by their member salvage companies when coastal states refuse access to their ports to a ship in danger of foundering, with the consequent risk of heavy pollution damage claims.

Dr Morrison concludes that, while the IMO Guidelines are “a good first step”, their failure to deal with the issues of liability and compensation runs the risk of severely hampering their acceptance by coastal states, and of risk-based decisions’ being overruled on political or other extraneous