Marine Collision, Salvage & General Average in the UAE

A serious maritime casualty rarely produces only one legal claim. A collision can damage two vessels, injure crew, interrupt cargo delivery, require emergency towage or salvage, trigger environmental-response costs and lead the master to make extraordinary sacrifices or expenditures to preserve the common maritime adventure. Each category of loss may be allocated under a different legal mechanism.

In the United Arab Emirates, the principal framework is Federal Decree-Law No. 43 of 2023 Concerning the Maritime Law, which came into force on 29 March 2024 and replaced the former 1981 maritime legislation. The law contains separate chapters dealing with ship collisions, marine salvage and general average losses. Understanding where one regime ends and another begins is critical for shipowners, charterers, cargo interests, insurers, P&I clubs, salvors, freight interests and financiers responding to a casualty.

Three different mechanisms for allocating casualty loss

The three concepts addressed in this article should not be treated as interchangeable.

Mechanism	Core question	Typical economic effect
Collision liability	Whose fault caused the collision or navigational damage?	The party at fault compensates damage, or liability is apportioned where fault is shared.
Salvage	Who voluntarily or exceptionally preserved a vessel, cargo or other maritime property from danger?	A successful salvor may earn a reward, subject to statutory criteria and the value saved.
General average	Was an extraordinary sacrifice or expenditure intentionally and reasonably made for the common safety?	Qualifying losses are shared among the maritime interests according to their contributory values.

A single casualty may activate all three regimes. For example, a negligent collision may leave a container ship disabled. A tug may then perform salvage. The master may later incur extraordinary expenditure to reach a port of refuge and make the vessel fit to continue. Collision liability, salvage remuneration and general average may therefore need to be analysed in parallel.

Collision liability under the UAE Maritime Law

Articles 235 to 241 of the Maritime Law govern ship collisions. Article 235 applies not only to direct physical contact between vessels. The collision chapter can also apply where a ship causes damage to another vessel, or to persons or property on board it, through an act, omission or negligence in the ship's movement or through failure to comply with applicable legislation or ratified international agreements, even where no physical collision occurs.

This matters in casualties involving wake damage, unsafe manoeuvring, navigational interference or other situations where one vessel causes loss without actually striking the other.

Single-vessel fault

Article 237 provides that where a collision results from the fault of one of the vessels or floating facilities involved, that vessel bears the obligation to compensate the resulting damage. The law also states that legal presumptions do not apply to the errors giving rise to collision liability. The evidence surrounding navigation and causation therefore becomes central.

The same article provides that the ship's husband is liable for damage caused by the ship to third parties where it results from the fault of the pilot, even where pilotage is compulsory.

Shared fault

Where fault is shared, Article 238 allocates liability between the vessels in proportion to their respective fault. If the circumstances prevent the proportion of fault from being determined, liability is distributed equally.

For property damage—including damage to the vessels, cargo, luggage and other property on board—the ships are liable to third parties within their allocated percentages and without joint liability between them under Article 238. The position is different where the collision causes death or personal injury: the legislation provides for joint liability in that category, with a ship that pays more than its share having a right of recourse against the other vessel or vessels involved.

Force majeure or uncertain cause

Article 239 addresses casualties where the collision results from force majeure, where the cause is unknown or where there is doubt about its cause. In those circumstances, each vessel or floating facility bears the damage it sustains, including where one or more of the vessels were anchored at the time.

A casualty should not be classified as “shared fault” simply because two vessels were involved. UAE law distinguishes proven fault, shared fault and cases where the cause is force majeure, unknown or doubtful.

Immediate duties after a collision

Article 236 places an immediate obligation on the captain or commander of a vessel involved in a collision to provide salvage assistance to the other vessel and to persons on board where this can be done without exposing his own vessel, crew or passengers to serious danger. The captain must also provide identifying voyage information, including the vessel's name, port of registration, departure port and destination.

From a claims perspective, the first hours after a casualty are also critical for evidence. Parties should preserve, where available and lawful:

voyage data recorder information;
AIS and ECDIS records;
bridge logs and engine-room logs;
radar screenshots and electronic navigation data;
pilotage and tug records;
weather and visibility information;
crew statements and watch schedules;
photographs, CCTV and drone imagery;
damage surveys and repair evidence; and
communications with port, coastguard, insurers and counterparties.

Early preservation matters because the legal allocation of collision loss depends heavily on proving causation and the relative conduct of the vessels.

Where may a UAE collision claim be brought?

Article 240 provides several jurisdictional gateways for collision proceedings in the UAE. Depending on the circumstances, proceedings may be brought before the court where the defendant is domiciled, where the defendant vessel is registered, where the collision occurred or where an admissible attachment of the defendant's vessel or another vessel owned by the defendant is located. The parties may also agree on another court or arbitration, subject to the applicable legal framework.

Jurisdiction should therefore be assessed alongside any potential ship-arrest strategy. A party responding to a casualty should not assume that the place of collision is the only available UAE forum.

The one-year collision time limit

Article 241 states that, in the event of denial and absence of a legally admissible excuse, compensation claims arising from a ship collision are not heard after one year from the date of the incident. It also provides a one-year rule for certain recourse claims connected with death or physical injury under Article 238(3).

This is a short period for a technically complex casualty. Owners, cargo interests and insurers should therefore investigate liability, obtain surveys and expert evidence, identify the correct defendants and preserve procedural rights promptly.

Salvage: reward for preserving property from maritime danger

Articles 242 to 253 create the UAE statutory regime for marine salvage. It applies to salvage services provided to ships in danger, persons on board, carried property and freight, and also extends to similar services involving vessels navigating in internal waters.

The core economic principle appears in Article 244: a salvage or rescue operation that produces a beneficial result gives rise to entitlement to a fair reward, subject to the reward not exceeding the value of the property saved. The law also recognises that salvage services may earn a reward even where the assisting and assisted vessels are owned by the same person.

No automatic reward for every tow

Not every towing operation is salvage. Article 246 states that a towing or pilotage vessel is not entitled to a salvage reward merely for performing the services it was already engaged to provide. A reward becomes relevant where exceptional services are provided outside the ordinary scope of towing or pilotage.

This distinction can become contentious after an emergency. A routine harbour tow may transform into a salvage operation if an unexpected peril develops and the tug undertakes extraordinary services. Whether that threshold has been crossed will depend on the facts, the danger, the existing contractual duty and the nature of the services actually performed.

How is a salvage reward determined?

The parties may agree the amount of the salvage reward. If they do not, Article 247 allows the court to determine it and to determine the appropriate distribution among participating vessels and, where relevant, among owners, captains and seafarers.

Article 249 directs attention to factors including the benefit produced by the salvage, the skill and efforts of the salvors, the danger faced by the vessel, passengers, crew, cargo and salvors, the time spent, expenses and damage incurred, exposure to liability and other risks, the value of equipment used and the value of the property saved and freight.

The legislation also permits reduction or cancellation of a reward where those performing salvage engage in theft, embezzlement, fraud or other illegal conduct.

Environmental salvage and special compensation

Article 248 gives environmental protection a specific role. Where ordinary conditions for a salvage reward are not met, or the reward would be lower than the salvor's expenses, special compensation may be available where the ship or its cargo threatened environmental damage. The provision allows compensation for expenses and permits an increase where the salvor's efforts prevent or limit environmental damage, subject to the statutory framework and the court's role.

This means that salvage economics after an oil, chemical or other environmentally sensitive casualty can differ materially from a conventional property-salvage analysis.

Salvage agreements made under pressure

Casualties often require decisions within minutes. Article 251 recognises that imbalance by allowing the competent court, on application, to invalidate or amend a salvage agreement made at the time of danger and under its influence where the terms are unfair. The court may also intervene where consent was affected by fraud or where the reward is disproportionately high or low compared with the services performed.

Operational urgency therefore does not mean every casualty-time agreement is beyond later review.

The salvage claim also has a one-year rule

Article 253 provides that, in the event of denial and absence of a legally admissible excuse, a claim for a salvage reward is not heard after one year from completion of the salvage work. Salvors and parties defending salvage claims should record the completion date carefully.

General average: sharing extraordinary sacrifice for common safety

General average operates differently from collision liability. It is not primarily an exercise in deciding who was negligent. Instead, it reallocates certain extraordinary sacrifices and expenditures made intentionally and reasonably for the common safety of the ship and property participating in the maritime adventure.

The Maritime Law defines and regulates general average in Articles 254 to 277. Article 254 states that the statutory chapter applies unless the parties have made a special agreement; where neither the agreement nor the legislation resolves a point, maritime custom applies. This makes the governing charterparty, bill of lading and other contractual documents important when a casualty occurs.

Particular average is the starting presumption

Article 255 begins with an important evidential rule: a marine loss is presumed to be a private or particular loss. A party asserting that its loss qualifies as general average must prove that classification. A particular loss is borne by the owner of the damaged property or the party that incurred the expense, without prejudice to any separate recourse against a person responsible for the damage or a person who benefited from the expenditure.

What can qualify as general average?

Article 256 lists categories capable of being admitted in general average, including physical damage to the ship, damage to property on board, qualifying expenditure for the ship or onboard property, certain wages, fuel and supplies during an extended voyage caused by refuge or repairs, salvage and towing expenses, and the expenses of the general-average adjustment.

The statutory test also requires a direct connection between the admitted damage or expenditure and the sacrifice or expenditure decided by the master. Delay losses and indirect losses, such as differences in cargo prices, are expressly excluded from general average under Article 256.

Fault does not necessarily prevent general average

One of the most important features of Article 257 is that a loss may still be treated as general average even where the incident arose from the fault of one of the parties interested in the voyage. That classification does not remove the rights of other parties to pursue recourse against the party responsible for the fault.

This produces two distinct accounting tracks. The general-average adjustment can allocate the qualifying common sacrifice among the relevant maritime interests, while a separate liability claim may seek to shift the ultimate economic burden back to the party whose fault caused the casualty.

General average contribution and fault-based recovery can coexist. Contribution answers who must fund the common sacrifice in the adjustment; recourse answers who should ultimately bear loss because of legally attributable fault.

Who contributes to general average?

The Maritime Law creates a credit group for the losses and expenses admitted in general average and a debit group for the property and interests that contribute. Article 263 identifies the ship, freight and cargo interests used in the contributory calculation, while Article 266 provides that general-average losses are distributed among the parties concerned with the voyage in proportion to their share in the debit group.

The practical calculation is normally undertaken through an adjustment process rather than by applying a simple percentage at the moment of casualty. Values, sacrifices, expenses and security must be documented and reconciled.

General average security can affect cargo delivery

Article 268 allows the captain to refrain from delivering cargo that should contribute to general average, or to request that it be deposited with a third party, unless the cargo owner provides sufficient security for its contribution. If the parties cannot agree on the security, the issue may be referred to the judge of urgent matters at the port of discharge or to the arbitration tribunal.

This is commercially significant for cargo interests. Even cargo that arrives physically undamaged may face a security requirement after a general-average declaration. Cargo insurers and recovery teams should therefore respond quickly to requests for general-average guarantees, bonds, valuations and supporting documents.

The role of the average adjuster

Article 269 provides for general-average losses to be adjusted by one or more settlement experts appointed by the parties. If they cannot agree, the judge of urgent matters at the court for the last port of discharge may appoint the expert; where that port is outside the UAE, the law provides jurisdiction connected to the vessel's port of registration.

The settlement expert may use marine experts to determine the credit and debit groups and must prepare a preliminary report on the causes of the incident within the statutory framework. Casualty evidence therefore affects not only collision litigation but also the adjustment itself.

Notice and limitation periods in general average

Article 267 imposes a specific written-notice requirement connected with applications involving cargo damage: the captain must be notified within 10 days from the end of the voyage and delivery of the cargo. Where the application concerns damage to the ship, the cargo owners are to be notified within the same period.

Article 277 separately provides a one-year rule for proceedings concerning contribution to general average, calculated from the day the vessel arrived at the destination port or at the port where the voyage was interrupted, subject to the statutory interruption rules associated with appointment of the settlement expert and other applicable rules.

Marine insurance sits behind all three regimes

Collision, salvage and general average are legal allocation mechanisms, but the economic burden often passes through marine insurance. Hull and machinery insurance, protection and indemnity cover, cargo insurance and other policies may respond to different parts of the casualty.

The Maritime Law itself expressly addresses collision insurance. Article 314 provides, subject to its terms and the policy structure, for the insurer to pay compensation incurred by the insured toward third parties for collision caused by the fault of the insured ship or collision with fixed, moving or floating objects, except damage to persons, unless the parties structure the cover differently within the statutory framework.

Article 313 also recognises the relevance of an agreed ship value in the context of recourse for general-average contributions and salvage rewards. The actual insurance response, however, depends on the wording, deductibles, exclusions, insured interests and notification requirements of the individual policy.

One casualty, several overlapping claims

Consider a simplified example. Vessel A negligently collides with Vessel B. Vessel B loses propulsion and begins drifting toward shallow water. A professional tug intervenes and prevents grounding. The master later diverts to a port of refuge and incurs extraordinary expenditure to stabilise the vessel and preserve ship and cargo.

The casualty may generate:

a collision claim by Vessel B against Vessel A;
cargo claims arising from physical damage or delay, subject to the applicable carriage regime;
a salvage reward claim by the tug;
potential special environmental compensation if the statutory conditions are met;
a general-average adjustment for qualifying sacrifices and expenditures;
security demands against cargo before delivery;
hull, cargo and P&I insurance claims; and
recourse claims seeking to shift general-average or salvage costs toward the party legally responsible for the casualty.

The fact that one party may initially fund an expense does not necessarily determine who ultimately bears it.

Casualty-response checklist

Protect life, vessel and environment. Emergency response takes priority, including statutory assistance obligations.
Notify authorities and insurers. Follow the applicable port, flag, coastal-state, policy and contractual notification requirements.
Preserve evidence immediately. Secure electronic navigation data, logs, communications, surveys, photographs and witness evidence.
Identify every legal relationship. Review charterparties, bills of lading, towage agreements, salvage contracts, insurance policies and financing documents.
Separate collision fault from salvage and general average. Do not assume one allocation mechanism determines all losses.
Assess security. Consider ship arrest exposure, salvage security and general-average guarantees or bonds.
Calendar the shortest deadline. Collision, salvage and general-average claims carry short statutory periods.
Coordinate experts. Nautical experts, surveyors, naval architects, engineers, average adjusters and quantum experts may each address different issues.
Reserve recourse rights. Payment of a contribution or emergency expense should not inadvertently waive recovery against a responsible party.
Control communications. Casualty reports, admissions, settlement discussions and privilege issues should be managed carefully across jurisdictions.

Key takeaway

The UAE Maritime Law does not allocate every casualty loss through a single negligence test. Collision liability focuses on fault and causation. Salvage compensates successful or qualifying emergency assistance. General average spreads certain extraordinary sacrifices and expenditures across the maritime interests that benefited from preservation of the common adventure.

Because these systems can operate at the same time, an effective casualty strategy must map each item of loss to the correct legal mechanism, preserve evidence, secure claims and cargo where appropriate, coordinate insurance and protect recourse rights before the statutory deadlines expire.

HZ Legal can assist shipowners, charterers, cargo interests, marine insurers and commercial parties with UAE collision disputes, salvage claims, general-average issues, casualty-response strategy, security and recovery proceedings.

Official sources and verification notes

This article provides general information only and does not constitute legal advice. Maritime casualty outcomes depend on the vessel, cargo, charter and carriage documents, insurance arrangements, evidence, jurisdiction, security position and the facts of the incident. The official Arabic legislation prevails for interpretation where there is any inconsistency with an English translation. Specific advice should be obtained promptly because maritime claims may be subject to short notice and limitation periods.