Survival craft certificate ‘still not always mandatory after all’

The news that the court is upholding the requirement of the certificate life-saving equipment for sea-going vessel crews did not quite cover it, according to legal counsel Fokko Snoek.

“Objections by skippers of eight ocean-going sailing charter vessels to the new requirement that at least one crew member on board must have a valid life-saving equipment certificate were rejected by the court. […] In June, the Human Environment and Transport Inspectorate (IL&T) informed skippers that the generic exemption for crew members on seagoing sailing vessels smaller than 500 GT (gross tonnage) to hold the certificate of competency in life-saving equipment will expire from 1 December 2025.”
So reported the Schuttevaer in an extensive article on 27 November, and in the Zeepost and the Windassist we took up that news. Fokko Snoek of Quality Sailing, which provides legal assistance to the litigating skippers, wrote to us that things are slightly different from what the Schuttevaer reporter suggested. In fact, reading the ruling, he wonders whether the judge really understood what the dispute is about. Moreover, there have been new developments in the meantime.

The dispute

The dispute concerns a clause on crew certificates, which states that at least one crew member must have sufficient experience with life-saving equipment. And that experience is included in the rating for officers on board seagoing sailing vessels. So a separate certificate to operate those life-saving appliances is not mandatory in this wording. In 2019, however, that wording was changed: from then on, IL&T did make a separate certificate mandatory. That means a new, expensive course, with information that largely deals with life-saving equipment not found on board sailing ships at all, while the knowledge actually required is already included in the ‘old’ crew certificate.

Fokko Snoek:

“That first formulation, whereby officers do not have to obtain a separate life-saving equipment certificate, I call for convenience the ‘favourable clause’. The wording that applies from 2019 – which, oddly enough, was not enforced by IL&T until 2023 – I call the ‘unfavourable clause’, because now one crew member does have to hold a separate life-saving equipment certificate. And that’s just the beginning: from 1 July 2026, all officers would have to hold such a certificate.

Already in May 2024, after an objection was lodged by the Abel Tasman and the intervention of the preliminary relief judge, IL&T issued temporary crew certificates with the ‘favourable clause’ to eight ships. And because the objection and appeal process took longer than expected, IL&T issued another eight temporary crew certificates (valid until 1 December 2025) with the ‘favourable clause’ on 1 February 2025. And in the context of equal treatment, IL&T also issued a statement to all other ship owners that they did not have to comply with the unfavourable clause mentioned on their crew certificates until 1 December 2025.”

Not understood

“In the court case, IL&T hoped for a ruling that would allow them to issue new certificates containing the ‘unfavourable clause’.
However, the court ruled otherwise: of the certificates issued on 1 February 2025 showing the ‘favourable clause’, only the validity period must be changed to be the same as that of the certificates originally objected to. For the rest, the certificate, including the ‘favourable clause’, should remain in place. These certificates would then be valid for several more years in many cases.

So for boaters, this was actually a favourable ruling, contrary to what was reported in the earlier news. With that, the strange situation arises that although the judge considers the certificate life-saving equipment to be mandatory on sailing vessels as well, he simultaneously ruled that crew certificates should be issued on which vessels are exempted from that obligation because of that ‘favourable clause’ contained therein.”

Plottwist

“So then there would be ships on which no crew member is required to have the life-saving equipment certificate until sometime in 2028. I am pretty sure that other ship owners will then invoke the principle of equality and also want to be exempted until then. And I think those shipowners have a good point.
It does not seem inconceivable that IL&T feels the same way, as a bizarre plot twist has now taken place.
Indeed, IL&T has decided to ignore the court’s order and issue crew certificates that do not comply with the court’s ruling. The certificates now issued no longer have a separate clause on the life-saving equipment at all, not the ‘unfavourable’ one. And that in turn means that there is no longer an exception to the law, which requires not only the captain and officers, but also companions in charge of a life raft, to have the life-saving equipment certificate.

The boatmen have since lodged another objection to this. They have also asked the court to hold IL&T to the ruling as a matter of urgency. This is because what also stings them in this matter is the way IL&T takes these kinds of measures, without consulting the industry first. If IL&T did so, the belief is that more in line with the specific conditions on seagoing sailing vessels, and thus ultimately more efficient and safer work could be done.

Whether the court will indeed hold IL&T to the ruling is not yet clear. It is possible that IL&T wants to wait and see how things play out at the court and at the Council of State, and that no action will be taken at all for the time being. To be continued.”

Fokko Snoek.

Windassist sponsor