Who gains from saving nature
Ledger 1 : 33 — For each dollar financing nature-based solutions in 2023, about $33 financed activities harmful to nature. (UNEP)
Cases / Oil spill · Venezuela · 1997–2014

Nissos Amorgos tanker spill, Gulf of Venezuela, 1997, and the US$60 million environmental-damage judgment

Nature's voice · report
About 3,600 tonnes of crude oil entered my waters in the Maracaibo Channel when the Nissos Amorgos ran aground on 28 February 1997, according to an IOPC estimate.
Did nature suffer? Yes. Harm is on record. Disputed
Recorded
  • The Venezuelan State claimed US$60,250,396 for environmental damage to me; Venezuelan courts awarded US$60 million in 2010–2013, plus indexation, interest and costs. IOPC Funds
  • Estimated 3,600 tonnes of oil entered my waters. estimate
    IOPC documents; tanker carrying about 75,000 tonnes.
What the record lacks: 2 none on record · 1 insufficient · 5 disputed · 2 unclear See the gaps
Accounts of the harm differ
Whether the State's environmental-damage claim is 'pollution damage' under the Conventions
  • International bodies 1971 Fund (IOPC Funds): The State's two claims of US$60,250,396 for environmental damage were not 'pollution damage' under the 1969 Civil Liability Convention and the 1971 Fund Convention, and were time-barred vis-à-vis the Fund. IOPC Funds (1971 Fund)
  • Courts Maracaibo Criminal Court (February 2010), Court of Appeal (March 2011), Supreme Court (May 2013): Ordered the master, shipowner and Gard Club to pay the State US$60 million plus indexation, interest and costs; the courts stated in obiter dicta that the shipowner and insurer could seek reimbursement from the 1971 Fund. IOPC Funds
  • International bodies IOPC Director (2014): The 1971 Fund has met its obligations under the 1971 Fund Convention and the pending litigation concerns claims inadmissible for compensation. IOPC Funds

The Greek tanker Nissos Amorgos ran aground in the Maracaibo Channel on 28 February 1997 and spilled an estimated 3,600 tonnes of crude oil. Venezuelan courts upheld a US$60 million environmental-damage claim by the State against the master, shipowner and Gard Club, while the 1971 Fund considered the claim inadmissible; payment to the State is not on record.

US$60 millionAwarded to the Venezuelan State for environmental damage by Venezuelan courts (final, May 2013)
Plus indexation, interest and costs, against the master, shipowner and Gard Club. Payment to the State: none on record.

Status As of the IOPC documents of 2014: the US$60 million judgment against the master, shipowner and Gard Club was final; Gard had sued the 1971 Fund in London; the Fund was dissolved on 31 December 2014; payment to the State is not on record.

What?
The tanker Nissos Amorgos ran aground in the Maracaibo Channel on 28 February 1997 and spilled an estimated 3,600 tonnes of crude oil; Venezuelan courts upheld a US$60 million environmental-damage claim by the State against the master, shipowner and Gard Club. IOPC Funds
Where?
Maracaibo Channel, Gulf of Venezuela (about 10.95 N, 71.60 W); courts in Cabimas and Maracaibo, and the High Court in London. IOPC Funds
When?
Grounding on 28 February 1997; Venezuelan judgments February 2010 to May 2013; London action served 19 March 2014; 1971 Fund dissolved 31 December 2014. IOPC Funds
Who?
Gained
  • PDVSA, ICLAM, shrimp fishermen and processors — Claims settled and paid by Gard Club and the 1971 Fund, 1997–2002 (US$24,397,612 and Bs288 million in total) IOPC Funds
Lost
  • Gard Club — Defendant in the US$60 million judgment; sought reimbursement from the 1971 Fund IOPC Funds
  • 1971 Fund (IOPC Funds) — Paid its share of settled claims; incurred defence costs of about £1 million for the last four months of 2014 (estimate) IOPC Funds
Harmed
  • Maracaibo Channel and Gulf of Venezuela — An estimated 3,600 tonnes of crude oil spilled IOPC Funds
Why?
The tanker ran aground in the Maracaibo Channel. Not disclosed: the cause of the grounding. IOPC Funds (1971 Fund)
How?
Claims were settled by Gard Club and the 1971 Fund; the State's environmental-damage claim was upheld by Venezuelan courts and considered inadmissible by the 1971 Fund, leading to Gard's London action. IOPC Funds
6 of 6 questions answered from the record

What happened

The record, in order.

The Greek-flag tanker Nissos Amorgos (50,563 GRT), carrying about 75,000 tonnes of Venezuelan crude, ran aground in the Maracaibo Channel, Gulf of Venezuela, on 28 February 1997. An estimated 3,600 tonnes of crude oil was spilled. The P&I insurer was Assuranceföreningen Gard (Gard Club).

In June 1997 the Criminal Court of Cabimas set the shipowner's liability limit at 5.2 million SDR (Bs3,473,462,786 or US$7.3 million) and the limit under the Civil Liability Convention plus the Fund at 60 million SDR (Bs39,738,409,500 or US$83,221,800). Claims settled and paid between 1997 and 2002 totalled Bs288 million (£42,000) plus US$24,397,612 (£15 million), paid by Gard Club and the 1971 Fund; the settled claimants were PDVSA (clean-up and preventive measures), the Instituto para el Control y la Conservación de la Cuenca del Lago de Maracaibo (ICLAM; loss of income) and shrimp fishermen and processors (property damage and loss of income).

The Venezuelan State filed two duplicated claims for 'Environmental damage' of US$60,250,396 each, one in the Criminal Court and one in the Civil Court. The 1971 Fund considered them inadmissible, as not 'pollution damage' under the 1969 Civil Liability Convention and the 1971 Fund Convention, and time-barred vis-à-vis the Fund. Three fish processors claimed US$30,000,000 for loss of income; the Fund's position was 'No loss proven'.

In February 2010 the Maracaibo Criminal Court ordered the master, shipowner and Gard Club to pay the Venezuelan State US$60 million plus indexation, interest and costs, and denied limitation of liability. The Court of Appeal upheld the judgment in March 2011 and the Supreme Court in May 2013; the IOPC Secretariat noted that the Supreme Court judgment was final. The courts stated, in obiter dicta, that the shipowner and insurer could seek reimbursement from the 1971 Fund.

Separately, in the criminal proceedings against the master, the Criminal Court of Appeal held in February 2005 that it was proved that the master had incurred criminal liability due to negligence causing pollution damage to the environment, and declared the action time-barred under Venezuelan procedural law, without prejudice to civil liabilities. In March 2007 the Supreme Court (Constitutional Section) annulled that judgment and returned the file.

Gard Club argued that a 1997 agreement bound the Fund to reimburse it, and sued the 1971 Fund in the High Court in London (served 19 March 2014), seeking a freezing injunction of up to US$58 million. In 2013–2014 the 1971 Fund Administrative Council decided not to reimburse Gard and to discontinue its defence in the Venezuelan courts. The 1971 Fund offered Gard US$344,090 as its share of joint costs; Gard did not accept. The 1971 Fund was dissolved on 31 December 2014; its Nissos Amorgos Major Claims Fund was estimated at about £975,000 at the end of 2014, with defence costs for the Gard litigation estimated at about £1 million for the last four months of 2014.

  1. 1997Grounding in the Maracaibo Channel (28 Feb); Criminal Court of Cabimas sets liability limits (June)
  2. 2002Claims settled and paid between 1997 and 2002: Bs288 million plus US$24,397,612
  3. 2005Criminal Court of Appeal holds the master's criminal liability for negligence proved and the action time-barred (Feb)
  4. 2007Supreme Court (Constitutional Section) annuls the 2005 judgment (March)
  5. 2010Maracaibo Criminal Court orders the master, shipowner and Gard Club to pay the State US$60 million (Feb)
  6. 2011Court of Appeal upholds the judgment (March)
  7. 2013Supreme Court upholds the judgment, final (May); 1971 Fund Council starts deciding not to reimburse Gard
  8. 2014Gard sues the 1971 Fund in London, served 19 March; 1971 Fund dissolved 31 December

What was said

Claims, in the words of those who made them.

“had incurred criminal liability due to negligence causing pollution damage to the environment”

Criminal Court of Appeal, Venezuela, on the master, as quoted by the 1971 Fund · February 2005 · IOPC Funds (1971 Fund)

“The judgement by the Supreme Court is now final.”

IOPC Secretariat note on the Nissos Amorgos · April 2014 · IOPC Funds

“No loss proven”

“the 1971 Fund has met its obligations under the 1971 Fund Convention and that the pending litigation is in respect of claims which are inadmissible for compensation.”

IOPC Director, 1971 Fund financial position note · 2014 · IOPC Funds

Where accounts differ

Each party's account, side by side, with its source. The record does not settle these points; it shows them.

Whether the State's environmental-damage claim is 'pollution damage' under the Conventions
International bodies
1971 Fund (IOPC Funds)

The State's two claims of US$60,250,396 for environmental damage were not 'pollution damage' under the 1969 Civil Liability Convention and the 1971 Fund Convention, and were time-barred vis-à-vis the Fund.

IOPC Funds (1971 Fund)
Courts
Maracaibo Criminal Court (February 2010), Court of Appeal (March 2011), Supreme Court (May 2013)

Ordered the master, shipowner and Gard Club to pay the State US$60 million plus indexation, interest and costs; the courts stated in obiter dicta that the shipowner and insurer could seek reimbursement from the 1971 Fund.

IOPC Funds
International bodies
IOPC Director (2014)

The 1971 Fund has met its obligations under the 1971 Fund Convention and the pending litigation concerns claims inadmissible for compensation.

IOPC Funds
Whether the shipowner could limit its liability
Courts
Criminal Court of Cabimas (June 1997)

Set the shipowner's limit at 5.2 million SDR (Bs3,473,462,786 or US$7.3 million) and the Convention plus Fund limit at 60 million SDR.

IOPC Funds
Courts
Maracaibo Criminal Court (February 2010) and Supreme Court (May 2013)

Denied limitation and ordered payment of US$60 million to the State plus indexation, interest and costs.

IOPC Funds
Whether Gard Club is entitled to reimbursement from the 1971 Fund
Company or project
Gard Club

A 1997 agreement bound the Fund to reimburse it; it sued the Fund in the High Court in London (served 19 March 2014).

IOPC Funds
International bodies
1971 Fund Administrative Council (2013–2014)

Decided not to reimburse Gard and to discontinue the Fund's defence in the Venezuelan courts.

IOPC Funds
Fish processors' claim of US$30,000,000 for loss of income
Communities and civil society
Three fish processors

Claimed US$30,000,000 for loss of income.

IOPC Funds (1971 Fund)
International bodies
1971 Fund (IOPC Funds)

No loss proven.

IOPC Funds (1971 Fund)

How it looked

What was shown, beside what was recorded.

Shown

  • The Venezuelan State's environmental-damage claims of US$60,250,396 were inadmissible as not 'pollution damage' and time-barred vis-à-vis the Fund
    1971 Fund (IOPC Funds) · IOPC Funds (1971 Fund)
  • A 1997 agreement bound the 1971 Fund to reimburse Gard Club
    Gard Club · IOPC Funds

Recorded

  • An estimated 3,600 tonnes of crude oil was spilled when the tanker ran aground on 28 February 1997.
    IOPC Funds
  • Claims settled and paid between 1997 and 2002 totalled Bs288 million (£42,000) plus US$24,397,612 (£15 million), paid by Gard Club and the 1971 Fund to PDVSA, ICLAM and shrimp fishermen and processors.
    IOPC Funds
  • The Venezuelan courts ordered the master, shipowner and Gard Club to pay the State US$60 million plus indexation, interest and costs (Maracaibo Criminal Court, February 2010; Court of Appeal, March 2011; Supreme Court, May 2013).
    IOPC Funds
  • The 1971 Fund Administrative Council decided in 2013–2014 not to reimburse Gard and to discontinue the Fund's defence in the Venezuelan courts; the 1971 Fund was dissolved with effect from 31 December 2014.
    IOPC Funds

Who gained

Money that reached nature, beside money that stayed elsewhere.

Reached nature or the ground

Not published
Venezuelan State's environmental-damage claim; awarded by Venezuelan courts plus indexation, interest and costs$60m
Two duplicated claims of US$60,250,396 each. Payment to the State: none on record.

Gained elsewhere

Not totalled
Claims settled and paid by Gard Club and the 1971 Fund, 1997–2002$24m
Plus Bs288 million (£42,000).
Fish processors' claim for loss of income$30m
1971 Fund position: no loss proven.
1971 Fund share of joint costs offered to Gard$0.34m
Gard did not accept.
Currency: USD · Window: 1997–2014. All figures cover the same period. * Estimate built from cited figures.

Responses on record

  • iopc-funds (2014): The IOPC Director said the 1971 Fund had met its obligations under the 1971 Fund Convention and that the pending litigation concerned claims inadmissible for compensation. · IOPC Funds
  • gard-club (2014): Argued that a 1997 agreement bound the 1971 Fund to reimburse it, and sued the Fund in the High Court in London. · IOPC Funds

In court and with insurers

Every proceeding and every insurer decision on record.

Lawsuits and rulings

  1. 2013Claimant won$60m awarded plus indexation, interest and costs
    Venezuelan State v. master, shipowner and Gard Club (environmental damage)
    Maracaibo Criminal Court of First Instance; Court of Appeal; Supreme Court · Civil · Venezuelan State → Master, shipowner and Gard Club

    In February 2010 the Maracaibo Criminal Court ordered the master, shipowner and Gard Club to pay the State US$60 million plus indexation, interest and costs, and denied limitation of liability. The Court of Appeal upheld the judgment in March 2011 and the Supreme Court in May 2013; the IOPC Secretariat noted that the Supreme Court judgment was final. IOPC Funds

  2. 2007Overturned on appeal
    Criminal proceedings against the master
    Criminal Court of Appeal; Supreme Court (Constitutional Section) · Criminal · Venezuelan State (criminal proceedings) → The master of the Nissos Amorgos

    In February 2005 the Criminal Court of Appeal held it proved that the master had incurred criminal liability due to negligence causing pollution damage to the environment, and declared the action time-barred under Venezuelan procedural law, without prejudice to civil liabilities. In March 2007 the Supreme Court (Constitutional Section) annulled that judgment and returned the file. IOPC Funds (1971 Fund)

  3. 2014–Outcome not on record$58m freezing injunction sought up to
    Gard Club v. 1971 Fund (reimbursement)
    High Court, London · Civil · Gard Club → 1971 Fund (IOPC Funds)

    Gard Club sued the 1971 Fund in the High Court in London (served 19 March 2014), arguing that a 1997 agreement bound the Fund to reimburse it, and sought a freezing injunction of up to US$58 million. In 2013–2014 the 1971 Fund Administrative Council had decided not to reimburse Gard and to discontinue its defence in the Venezuelan courts. IOPC Funds

Insurers

  1. 2014In litigation$60m judgment against Gard Club and others, plus indexation, interest and costs
    Assuranceföreningen Gard (Gard Club) → Owner of the Nissos Amorgos
    Stated reason: Gard argued that a 1997 agreement bound the 1971 Fund to reimburse it; the 1971 Fund Council decided not to reimburse.

    Gard provided a bank guarantee for the limitation fund in 1997 and, with the 1971 Fund, paid claims settled between 1997 and 2002. It was a defendant in the US$60 million Venezuelan judgment and sued the 1971 Fund in London in 2014. Whether Gard paid the State is not on record. IOPC Funds

  2. 2014Partly paid$24.4m settled claims paid jointly with Gard Club, 1997–2002, plus Bs288 million
    1971 Fund (IOPC Funds) → Claimants for pollution damage from the Nissos Amorgos
    Stated reason: The State's environmental-damage claims were considered inadmissible and time-barred vis-à-vis the Fund.

    The Fund paid its share of the settled claims of PDVSA, ICLAM and shrimp fishermen and processors, refused the State's two environmental-damage claims, and decided in 2013–2014 not to reimburse Gard. It was dissolved on 31 December 2014. IOPC Funds (1971 Fund)

What nature saw

Outcomes measured on the ground, and nature's note.

Nature's report opens this page. Below: further outcomes measured on the ground.

Crude oil spilled
About 3,600 tonnes
Estimate in IOPC documents
Awarded to the State for environmental damage
US$60 million
Venezuelan courts, final May 2013; payment not on record
Settled and paid to claimants, 1997–2002
US$24,397,612 plus Bs288 million
Gard Club and the 1971 Fund

What we don't know

Undisclosed, unproven, untried: recorded as data.
Court ruling existsNo independent ecological evaluation

Nature

  • Disputed Whether the State's environmental-damage claim is 'pollution damage' under the Conventions

Court

  • Unclear Gard Club v. 1971 Fund (reimbursement): outcome not on record.

Accounts

  • Disputed Whether the shipowner could limit its liability
  • Disputed Whether Gard Club is entitled to reimbursement from the 1971 Fund
  • Disputed Fish processors' claim of US$30,000,000 for loss of income

Record

  • None on record None on record: payment of the US$60 million to the Venezuelan State; the IOPC documents say the Supreme Court judgment is final but do not say whether Gard paid.
  • None on record None on record: how any award to the State was spent on the environment.
  • Insufficient Insufficient: the IOPC documents give the volume spilled (an estimated 3,600 tonnes) but no ecological measurements.
  • Unclear Unclear: the split of the settled claims between PDVSA, ICLAM and the shrimp fishermen and processors.
  • Disputed Disputed: whether the State's environmental-damage claim is 'pollution damage' under the Conventions, and whether the shipowner could limit liability (see disputes).

Did the harm stop?

A single grounding event on 28 February 1997.

Who paid?

Claims settled between 1997 and 2002 (US$24,397,612 and Bs288 million) were paid by Gard Club and the 1971 Fund. Payment of the US$60 million awarded to the State: none on record.

Sources

Voices on record: — Company or project— Government and regulators— Courts— Press and investigations— Communities and civil society— Researchers✓ International bodies

International bodies

  1. Nissos Amorgos, IOPC/MAY14/3/10
    IOPC Funds · 2014-04-22
  2. Nissos Amorgos, 71FUND/A/ES.8/5
    IOPC Funds (1971 Fund) · 2001-06-20
  3. Nissos Amorgos, 71FUND/AC.22/12/2
    IOPC Funds (1971 Fund) · 2007-09-06
  4. 1971 Fund matters, IOPC/MAY14/7/1
    IOPC Funds · 2014-04-22

Connected cases

Related matters, and cases linked to this one through the same organisations, with the role each played in both.
Terms used on this page

Insurance

IOPC Funds
The International Oil Pollution Compensation Funds: intergovernmental funds, financed by companies that receive oil by sea, that pay for tanker oil-spill damage above the shipowner's liability limit.
P&I club
A protection and indemnity club: a mutual association of shipowners that covers members' liabilities to third parties, including oil pollution.

Law and courts

Negligence and gross negligence
Negligence is a failure to take reasonable care. Gross negligence is a serious, reckless failure; under US oil-spill law a finding of gross negligence raises the maximum penalty.
Statute of limitations, time-barred
The legal time limit for bringing or completing a case. A time-barred case can no longer lead to a penalty, even if guilt was found.

Bonds and banking

Guarantee
A commitment by a third party, often a development bank, to pay if the borrower does not.
Similar cases
Oil spill · Tanker / shipping · Insurance, liability and compensation funds · India · 2011–2016
MV Rak Carrier coal and oil spill (Mumbai)
Same type: Oil spill, Tanker / shipping, Insurance, liability and compensation fundsCourt: won by claimant, outcome not on recordHarm to nature disputed
Oil spill · Tanker / shipping · Fuel / diesel spill · Insurance, liability and compensation funds · Mauritius · 2020
MV Wakashio oil spill (Mauritius)
Same type: Oil spill, Tanker / shipping, Insurance, liability and compensation fundsCourt: outcome not on record