Although in the history of English Admiralty jurisprudence there have been advanced several exemplary literary formulations of the concept of salvage it may nonetheless in less elevated verbal tones be quite adequately described as an altruistic service voluntarily performed which successfully extricates or contributes to the extrication of an imperilled and recognised salvage subject matter. Success having been achieved and benefit conferred the acclaimed labourer and benefactor is entitled to a reward with regard to which the recovered res represents both a fiscal indicant and security.

The current century has witnessed the increased, and increasing, popularity of arbitration as a means of resolving salvage disputes. Although the claims of arbitration are easy to comprehend its regrettable effect has been a drastic reduction in the number of publicly reported decisions. The upshot must doubtless be that much legal application and rules of practice fail to disseminate beyond the inner nautical wheel of the Metropolis. Nonetheless, that which has been reported has dominantly been concerned with what may be considered the most keen and volatile issue in salvage law—the extent salvors are liable for the consequences of their negligent acts or omissions. It is the object of this tract to examine the emergent law and its evolutionary course.

There can be no equivocation surrounding the legal duty owed by a salvor to the recipient of his service. A limited obligation was recognised by the Rhodian Sea Laws1 and today it may be confidently asserted that

the negligent performance of the duty she has undertaken.”2

If the reality of the “duty” is currently accepted the “standard of care” it embodies has proved more troublesome. The issue has been increased in complexity, at least in its historical perspective, because negligence in its effect has possessed an omniferous quality and also because of the powerful public policy considerations which have been such a force in the development of salvage law.