Page 10: of Maritime Reporter Magazine (August 2026)

Legal Beat

The Chamber’s Ruling the ? ag state is a small nation operating an open registry.

The Special Chamber, presided over by Judge Albert Ho? - mann of South Africa, ruled unanimously against Equatorial Limits on Anti-Piracy Enforcement Powers

Guinea on all counts. The judgment methodically dismantled The judgment imposes clear limits on states’ anti-piracy en- each of the respondent’s defenses. forcement powers. Regional cooperation arrangements such as

First, the Chamber held that Equatorial Guinea’s intercep- the Yaoundé Code, which seeks to operationalize anti-piracy tion of the vessel in São Tomé and Príncipe’s EEZ – including cooperation in Central and West Africa, cannot confer pow- threatening force and compelling a change of course – consti- ers beyond those contained in UNCLOS itself. A state cannot tuted a clear breach of freedom of navigation under Articles simply invoke “cooperation against piracy” as a blanket jus- 87(1), 90, and 92(1) of the United Nations Convention on the ti? cation for seizing foreign vessels without proper grounds.

Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The duty to cooperate does not create autonomous enforcement

Second, the Chamber rejected Equatorial Guinea’s claim powers – states must still satisfy the speci? c conditions set forth that its actions were justi? ed under regional anti-piracy coop- in UNCLOS before taking action against suspected pirates.

eration arrangements. The tribunal clari? ed that while states have a duty to cooperate in repressing piracy under Article Crew Protection and State Responsibility 100 of UNCLOS, this duty “does not provide an autonomous The ruling sets important precedent for crew protection. basis for seizure.” Any enforcement action must conform International tribunals have long established that a ship, its strictly to the speci? c conditions in Articles 101 to 107, read crew, and its owners form an indivisible legal unit under the with Article 110. A coastal state cannot rely on a generalized ? ag state’s protection. The Chamber con? rmed that the rights duty of cooperation to board, seize, or divert a foreign vessel of the ? ag state under UNCLOS extend beyond the vessel without satisfying those requirements. itself and encompass the protection of all those serving on

Third, the Chamber found that Equatorial Guinea’s domes- board, regardless of their nationality. Critically, the Chamber tic laws provided no valid basis for the ? nes imposed. Inter- held that the exhaustion of local remedies requirement does national law does not permit a state to ? ne a foreign vessel not apply where individuals are present in a state’s territory simply for transiting its EEZ or for not ? ying a physical ? ag solely because of that state’s unlawful conduct. A state can- – provisions that are ? atly inconsistent with UNCLOS. not create jurisdiction over foreign nationals through its own illegal actions and then demand they exhaust local remedies

Record-breaking Damages before seeking international recourse.

The tribunal ordered Equatorial Guinea to pay €2,000,132 (approximately $2.3 million) representing the illegally im- Signi? cance for Future Maritime Disputes posed ? ne, plus more than $12 million in additional damages. The record-breaking damages award signals that interna-

This included $5.9 million for loss of hire during the vessel’s tional maritime law has real ? nancial consequences. While in- detention and just under $4.2 million speci? cally directed to cidents of this precise nature may be relatively rare, this case the 26 crew members for non-material damages arising from serves as valuable precedent and powerful messaging for the their mistreatment. The total award of over €14 million repre- entire industry. The innovative approach taken by the legal sents the highest damages award in ITLOS history. team – submitting detailed, evidence-backed damages calcu-

We at Reed Smith think the implications of this ruling are lations rather than seeking nominal ? nes – enabled the tribu- especially important today for the maritime industry. nal to issue a far more substantial judgment and may serve as a template for future claimants.

Rea? rmation of Exclusive Flag State Jurisdiction & Free- The precedent may prove particularly relevant given cur- dom of Navigation rent tensions in maritime chokepoints. With periodic block-

This ruling stands as a powerful rea? rmation of two bed- ades and vessel seizures around the Strait of Hormuz continu- rock principles of international maritime law. Under UN- ing to make headlines, ? ag states and shipowners now have a

CLOS, a vessel ? ying a nation’s ? ag is under that state’s clear roadmap for pursuing substantial claims when their ves- exclusive jurisdiction while on the high seas or in an EEZ. sels and crews are unlawfully detained. The case demonstrates

Physical interference with a foreign-? agged vessel – includ- that when states take action under UNCLOS, the rule of law ing compelling a change of course under threat of force – vio- is upheld – and that the rights of those involved in maritime lates freedom of navigation unless justi? ed by speci? c pro- commerce carry meaningful ? nancial consequences.

visions of the Convention or other international treaties. The For shipowners, charterers, and ? ag states, the message is

Chamber’s ruling sends a clear message that these principles clear: pursue claims when vessels and crews are improperly have real, enforceable teeth in international courts, even when treated. Recovery is possible – and in this case, substantial.

10 Maritime Reporter & Engineering News • August 2026

MR #8 (1-17).indd 10 MR #8 (1-17).indd 10 8/6/2026 2:48:49 PM8/6/2026 2:48:49 PM