Limitation of liability in maritime accidents is a special legal regime that can be applied to the total of certain maritime claims in respect of certain persons. Limitation under the LLMC is not identical to liability itself or to insurance coverage. First, it is determined whether the claim falls within the regime, who holds the right of limitation, the tonnage of the ship and the amounts to be applied; then the establishment of a fund, the status of existing security and the creditors’ participation in the distribution are examined.
Within what framework does the LLMC apply in Türkiye?
The LLMC refers to the 1976 Convention on Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims. Article 1328 of the Turkish Commercial Code (TTK) takes this framework as its basis, together with the 1996 Protocol and the amendments that have entered into force for Türkiye. It is therefore not correct to use only the initial monetary amounts of 1976. The supplementary provisions of the TTK, Türkiye’s reservations and the international regimes specific to particular types of damage must also be examined separately.
The IMO’s record of status and amendments dated September 30, 2026, together with its explanation of the LLMC, contains the increased general amounts adopted in 2012 and in force since June 8, 2015. The general calculation example in this article is based on these amounts. Without establishing the date of the incident, the applicable national law and the special exceptions, the figures in the table should not be carried over to all accidents. For application in Türkiye, TTK 1328 should be read together with the protocol and the amendment record.
Invoking the right of limitation is not, by itself, an admission of the debt or of fault. The defendant may first contend that it is not liable and, in the alternative, request limitation. Conversely, the establishment of a fund alone does not mean that the creditor has proved its entire allegation. Liability, the amount of the claim, inclusion in the fund and distribution are interrelated but separate assessments.
Who can benefit from the right of limitation?
Under the definitions of the LLMC, the concept of shipowner is not limited to the person whose name is entered in the register; the charterer, manager and operator may also be considered within the relevant scope. There are also provisions for salvors and for persons for whose acts one is responsible. However, the fact that a company carries on maritime activity does not automatically confer this right in respect of all claims directed against it. The status in which the company acted with respect to the incident and the claim must be shown.
An insurer that insures liability subject to limitation may benefit from the regime to the same extent as the insured, within the framework of LLMC Art. 1/6. This does not mean that every insurer who pays cargo damage and seeks recourse can limit its own payment amount under the LLMC. The position of a liability insurer as defendant differs from the position of a property insurer as a subrogated creditor. The policy limit does not replace the LLMC calculation either.
Foreign flag or foreign company status does not by itself settle the review. The scope of application of the Convention, the status of States as parties, TTK 1329–1330 and the relevant exceptions are taken into account. For a foreign law firm, the first set of documents should include the ship registry record, the operating and charter relationship on the date of the incident, the representation structure, the liability policy and the tonnage certificate. The link between the person seeking the right of limitation and the ship involved in the accident must be clearly established.
Which maritime claims can be limited?
LLMC Art. 2 regulates death, personal injury, damage to property and certain other claims connected with the operation of the ship or with salvage operations. Damage to the ship, the cargo, a port facility or third parties may have different legal characters in the same incident. Package- or kilogram-based limits in carriage law may also arise separately. Without examining their relationship with the LLMC, it is not correct to add all the limits together in the same file or to select only the lowest figure.
| Type of claim | First approach under the LLMC | Additional review |
|---|---|---|
| Damage to another ship or a port facility | May fall within the general regime | Link to the incident, the person making the claim and priority rules in Türkiye |
| Death and personal injury other than passenger claims | A separate general limit category may apply | Situations outside the scope, such as employee claims |
| Passenger losses | The special passenger regime is examined | The general property-claims table does not apply |
| Salvage remuneration and general average contribution | Exceptions under LLMC Art. 3 | Whether the claim is genuinely of this nature |
| Claims for wreck or cargo removal | The exclusion rule of TTK 1331 in Türkiye | Characterization under LLMC Art. 2/1(d) and (e) |
| Oil and other pollution damage | A special convention and scope review is required | Not every pollution claim is subject to the same regime |
In Türkiye, TTK 1331 is decisive for claims relating to the removal, clearance or rendering harmless of the ship and cargo under LLMC Art. 2/1(d) and (e), and for the exceptions in Art. 3. It is therefore not correct to place a wreck removal invoice in the fund for general property claims merely because it is connected with the accident. The consequences of the claim arising from an administrative act, a contract or a special international regulation are also examined separately.
As for salvage, two different positions must also be distinguished. A salvor’s claim for remuneration and the liability it incurs for damage it itself caused during salvage are not the same claim. In the first, a salvage remuneration outside the scope may be at issue; in the second, if the conditions are met, a liability that the salvor can limit may be discussed. Determining the legal basis of the claim rather than its everyday label secures this distinction.
How is the LLMC limit calculated by tonnage?
In the general calculation, the gross tonnage of the ship, determined under the relevant tonnage measurement rules, is used. GT is not the same as DWT, which is the weight of the cargo or the carrying capacity of the ship. The relevant tonnage certificate, rather than an approximate ship capacity found on the internet, should be taken as the basis. The certificate valid on the date of the incident and any changes to the ship are also examined where necessary. If the tonnage is taken incorrectly, the legal calculation will be wrong even if all the subsequent arithmetic is correct.
The table below is intended to illustrate two categories of the general regime for ships of 300 GT and above. Passenger claims and special national regulations are not included in this table. When the next higher band is reached, the entire tonnage is not multiplied by the coefficient of that band; only the tons falling within the relevant range are added.
| Tonnage band | Claims for death and personal injury other than passenger claims | Other general claims |
|---|---|---|
| 300–2,000 GT | 3,020,000 SDR base | 1,510,000 SDR base |
| Each additional ton between 2,001–30,000 GT | 1,208 SDR | 604 SDR |
| Each additional ton between 30,001–70,000 GT | 906 SDR | 453 SDR |
| Each additional ton above 70,000 GT | 604 SDR | 302 SDR |
Example calculation for a 10,000 GT ship
For other general claims, the base is 1,510,000 SDR. For the 8,000 tons above the first 2,000 GT, 604 SDR is added. The calculation is 1,510,000 + (8,000 × 604) = 6,342,000 SDR. For the same ship, the general calculation for the category of death and personal injury other than passenger claims is 3,020,000 + (8,000 × 1,208) = 12,684,000 SDR.
These figures are not compensation to be paid to a particular creditor. The example assumes that the claim is eligible for limitation, that the general regime applies and that the right has not been lost. In establishing a fund, the interest between the incident and the establishment of the fund and the relevant procedural conditions are assessed separately. The limit, deductible and currency in the insurance policy are not tonnage items that change this arithmetic; they are elements of a different relationship.
Small ships, passengers and SDR conversion
TTK 1332 contains a special regulation of 83,500 Special Drawing Rights for ships of less than 300 tons, with respect to the Convention’s category of other claims. The base of 1,510,000 SDR should therefore not be applied to small boats without examination. The special provisions on passenger claims, certain ships engaged in drilling and pilots are also dealt with separately, outside the general table. The amount of one exception cannot automatically be carried over to other categories.
The SDR, or Special Drawing Right (in Turkish, “Özel Çekme Hakkı”), is not a fixed euro or Turkish lira amount. The relevant conversion date is determined within the framework of LLMC Art. 8 and the nature of the specific transaction. An approximate calculation made at a daily rate seen on the internet does not replace the fund amount that the court will accept. For this reason, no definitive Turkish lira fund amount based on the current exchange rate is given in this article.
Through what conduct can the right of limitation be lost?
LLMC Art. 4 provides for a high threshold based on a personal act or omission committed with the intent to cause the loss, or recklessly and with knowledge that the loss would probably result. Not every navigational error, every allegation of gross negligence or the magnitude of the accident satisfies this condition by itself. The fault giving rise to liability and conduct of a kind that removes the right of limitation are different questions. The party making the allegation must specify the person concerned, the knowledge, the conduct and the connection with the loss.
IMO Resolution A.1164(32) offers a common interpretive framework explaining the exceptional nature of this threshold in the context of the 1996 Protocol. However, this resolution is neither a new amendment to the Convention nor a court judgment that resolves every specific incident. In Türkiye, the provisions of TTK 1343 on whose conduct is taken into account with respect to natural persons, the organs of legal entities and representatives must also be read.
How the conduct of the master or crew is to be assessed with respect to the owner is therefore not suited to careless generalization. The IMO resolution emphasizes an interpretation that separates the conduct of others from the owner’s personal conduct; the representative provision in TTK 1343 makes the examination of concrete authority and status important. Just as it cannot be said that every error of the master removes the owner’s right, it should not be asserted in advance that no representation relationship matters. Company instructions, known defects, management decisions and warnings before the incident may play a role in this examination.
Where and how is a limitation fund established in Türkiye?
TTK 1335 provides that the right of limitation may be invoked even without establishing a fund. However, relying on limitation as a defense is not the same procedure as establishing a fund for all the creditors concerned. A fund requires certain conditions with respect to the amount, the security, the place of application and the creditors’ access. LLMC Art. 11 allows a fund to be established in cash or by security that is acceptable under the law of the State concerned.
Subject-matter and territorial jurisdiction for foreign ships
According to TTK 1348, the establishment of the fund is based on the commercial court of first instance assigned to hear maritime commerce matters and the alternative jurisdictional arrangement set out in the article. Territorial jurisdiction is determined separately for a ship entered in the Turkish registry, a Turkish ship not entered in a registry and a foreign ship. For the establishment of a fund for foreign ships, the commercial court of first instance in Istanbul assigned to hear maritime commerce matters has jurisdiction. This special rule does not mean that all maritime actions in Türkiye must be brought only in Istanbul.
The application should present together the description of the incident and of the claims subject to limitation, the capacity of the applicant, the tonnage certificate, the regulation on which the calculation is based, and the information on interest and security. The nature and text of the security acceptable to the court should be evaluated before the application. It cannot be assured that a letter from a foreign P&I club or a document from a foreign bank will be accepted without any additional review. No general commitment on timing, that the fund will be established definitively on the same day as the application, should be given either.
Does a fund abroad automatically lift the attachment in Türkiye?
A document showing that a fund has been established in a foreign country is important, but by itself it is not a sufficient answer that automatically ends all proceedings in Türkiye. Within the framework of LLMC Art. 13, conditions such as the place where the fund is established, the ability of the relevant creditors to apply to the fund and the actual availability of the fund are assessed. The procedure of court and enforcement actions in Türkiye is followed separately. It must be explained to what extent the foreign fund, the principal claim and the local security are linked to one another.
What rights do creditors have over the fund and security?
The fund is established for the joint satisfaction of the claims that arise from the same incident and fall within the regime. It should not be thought that the general limit applies separately to each creditor. The creditor should show the legal basis of its claim, its amount, its falling into a category and its priority, if any. The fact that an action has been brought or the ship has been attached in another country does not mean that applications and objections in the fund procedure are unnecessary.
TTK 1345 provides that security in rem and personal security relating to a claim terminate at the moment the fund court accepts that the claim will enter the relevant fund. This provision should not be read as meaning that all security disappears automatically as soon as the fund petition is filed. The decision on the inclusion of the claim in the fund and the statutory conditions must be followed. It should also not be assumed that the priority afforded by the previous security will be carried over unchanged to the distribution of the fund.
In distribution, there are special rules in addition to general proportional allocation. Where the category of death and personal injury proves insufficient, the participation of the unmet portion in the other category is significant under LLMC Art. 6/2. TTK 1334 contains a priority provision relating to harbor works, basins, waterways and aids to navigation. It is therefore not correct to divide the total of the fund simply equally among all claims. The class of the claim may affect the likelihood of payment.
If an insurer or another person has made a payment in advance, subrogation vis-à-vis the fund may arise under LLMC Art. 12 and TTK 1344. Double participation must be prevented by documenting which claim has been paid and to what extent. Under TTK 1346, other creditors whose claims are not subject to limitation cannot, as a rule, share in this fund; the balance remaining after distribution is assessed separately. TTK 1349 also regulates the nature of the costs of proceedings and enforcement as falling outside the limitation. The amount of the fund is not the absolute total of all the financial consequences of the incident.
Conclusion
A review under the LLMC cannot be completed by looking only at the tonnage table. First the scope with respect to the person and the claim, then the applicable amount, the allegations of loss of the right and the fund procedure in Türkiye must be assessed. For creditors, participation in the fund, the category, priority and the status of existing security are important. For foreign shipowners and insurers, making these distinctions early ensures that decisions on litigation, security and collection are taken within the same legal framework.
Related articles: Removal of ship wrecks: costs, liable parties and P&I cover; Maritime accident claims in P&I insurance; Fault and compensation in ship collisions; Liability for damage to ports, piers and terminals; Recourse actions of foreign marine insurers.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is the LLMC limit the same as an insurance policy limit?
No. The LLMC is a statutory and international limitation regime for certain liabilities. The policy limit, by contrast, is the limit of the coverage in the insurance contract. In the same incident the two may be examined together; the amount of one cannot be written in place of the other. The deductible and the exceptions to coverage are also assessed separately.
What is the general property-claims limit for a 10,000 GT ship?
Under the assumptions of the increased general regime in this article, the calculation is 1,510,000 + 8,000 × 604 = 6,342,000 SDR. This is not the definitive amount to be paid to a particular creditor. Whether the claim falls within the scope, the date of the incident, the preservation of the right, interest and the fund procedure are examined separately.
Can wreck removal costs be limited under the LLMC in Türkiye?
TTK 1331 leaves the claims within LLMC Art. 2/1(d) and (e) outside the general limitation. It must be determined whether the expense is genuinely a claim for the removal of the ship or cargo under these subparagraphs. The fact that it appears on the same invoice as other accident costs does not automatically change its legal nature.
Does a serious error by the master remove the right of limitation?
It does not remove it automatically. The high fault threshold in LLMC Art. 4 and the knowledge and personal conduct of the person concerned are assessed. In Türkiye, the provision of TTK 1343 on organs and representatives and the IMO interpretive resolution must be examined together. Not every operational error produces the same legal result.
To which court is the fund application made for a foreign-flagged ship?
TTK 1348 gives jurisdiction, with respect to foreign ships, to the commercial court of first instance in Istanbul assigned to hear maritime commerce matters. This provision relates to the establishment of the fund. Subject-matter and territorial jurisdiction for the principal compensation action, precautionary attachment or any other procedure are determined separately.
Does all security end immediately once the fund is established?
The consequence in TTK 1345 is tied to the fund court’s acceptance that the relevant claim will enter the fund. It should not be assumed that all security ends merely because an application has been made. The effect of a foreign fund, the creditor’s access and the procedural steps in Türkiye are also assessed separately.
Sources and legal bases
- Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102 (6102 sayılı Türk Ticaret Kanunu) — Ministry of Trade (Ticaret Bakanlığı) copy, in particular Arts. 1328–1335 and 1342–1349.
- 1976 LLMC — text published by the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure (Ulaştırma ve Altyapı Bakanlığı), in particular Arts. 1–4 and 6–14. The monetary amounts must be read together with the subsequent protocols and amendments.
- IMO — LLMC and updated general limits.aspx), the 1996 Protocol and the 2012 amendments.
- IMO — Status of conventions, September 30, 2026, the 1996 Protocol, Türkiye’s position and reservations, and the acceptance and entry-into-force records of the 2012 amendments; PDF pp. 224, 234–235.
- IMO A.1164(32) — Resolution on the interpretation of the test for loss of the right to limit, the resolution adopted on December 15, 2021.
Source access and preparation date: October 14, 2026. The calculation is limited to the general regime and assumptions explained. The current consolidated legislation, the date of the incident and the provisions of any special convention must be checked in the specific file. This article is intended as general legal information.