Salvage of Sunken Ships, Removal of Wreckage, and Legal Liability of the Shipowner

Entrance

The sinking, grounding, partial submersion, or abandonment of ships as a result of maritime accidents has multifaceted consequences in terms of maritime law, administrative law, environmental law, and insurance law. The loss of a ship's economic value or its inability to navigate does not mean that its legal significance has ended. A sunken ship can obstruct maritime transport, disrupt the operation of ports and coastal facilities, cause oil or hazardous material leaks, damage underwater cables, and pose a collision risk to other ships in the vicinity.

Removing sunken ships can often incur costs far exceeding the economic value of the vessel. The location of the wreck, the depth of the water, the type of cargo on board, the amount of fuel, sea and weather conditions, whether the ship has been broken up, and environmental risks all determine the nature of the operation. Therefore, the most important legal questions in sunken ship incidents are: who owns the ship, who is responsible for removing the wreck, under what conditions public authorities can intervene ex officio, who will be held liable for the costs, and to what extent insurance coverage applies.

In Turkish law, the subject is not regulated in all its aspects in a single law. The Turkish Commercial Code, the Ports Law, the Ports Regulation, the Environmental Law, provisions relating to the ship registry, and the salvage and limitation of liability regime are applied together. Internationally, the Nairobi International Convention on the Removal of Wreckage of 2007 establishes a uniform system for the identification, marking, and removal of hazardous wreckage. The Convention was adopted on May 18, 2007, and entered into force on April 14, 2015.

Concepts of Wreck, Wreck, Abandoned and Derelict Ship

A ship is considered a "wreck" if it has completely settled on the seabed or is submerged. A "partially submerged" ship is one that is partially underwater and has significantly lost its buoyancy and navigation capabilities. A "grounded ship" is one whose hull is in contact with the seabed, shore, rocks, or shoals, preventing it from moving freely.

The concept of "wreckage" is broader than just a sunken ship. Besides the entire ship, parts detached from the ship, cargo, containers, machinery, and other items lost at sea as a result of an accident can also qualify as wreckage, depending on the specific conditions. The Nairobi Convention does not limit the concept of wreckage solely to sunken or grounded ships; it also includes items lost at sea from ships and ships that are about to sink or run aground, under certain conditions. The main objective of the Convention is the rapid identification and removal of wreckage that poses a threat to life and property, as well as to the marine environment.

A distinction should be made between an "abandoned ship" and legally abandoned property. Leaving a ship without crew, prolonged waiting in port, or the owner's lack of actual maintenance or payment of expenses does not, in itself, constitute the termination of ownership rights. An "idle ship" refers to a vessel that has been unused for a long time due to economic or technical reasons. Being idle does not automatically render the ship ownerless.

This distinction is important. A ship appearing ownerless or abandoned may authorize public authorities to intervene for navigational and environmental safety; however, whether ownership of the ship has ceased is determined separately according to private law rules. The public authority's power to remove, destroy, or sell the ship stems not from the automatic termination of ownership rights, but from its legal authority to protect public safety and the environment.

The Impact of a Ship Sinking on Property Rights

The sinking or destruction of a ship does not, as a rule, terminate ownership rights. The shipowner retains ownership rights even after the ship becomes a wreck. Ownership rights terminate only if the owner has legally declared their intention to relinquish ownership, the ship is transferred to another party through forced execution or administrative sale, it is completely destroyed, or another reason stipulated by the relevant legal system occurs.

The total economic loss of a ship is not the same as the termination of legal ownership. In insurance law, it is possible to consider a ship a total loss if the cost of repair or salvage exceeds its value. However, the payment of insurance compensation by the insurer does not automatically transfer ownership of the shipwreck to the insurer in all cases. The transfer of ownership of the wreck to the insurer must be evaluated according to the policy terms, the intentions of the parties, and the applicable law.

Mortgages, liens, or maritime creditors' rights on a ship do not automatically cease upon sinking. The Turkish Commercial Code stipulates that the statutory lien right granted by a maritime creditor's claim may also encompass the owner's claim for compensation from third parties due to the loss or damage of the ship. Thus, in the event of a decrease in the physical value of the ship, certain substitute values ​​may fall within the scope of the lien right.

However, if the wreckage is removed and sold by public authorities, a special liquidation system is applied. In this case, the removal and sale costs are first covered from the sale price, followed by payment of outstanding debts in order of priority. The sold ship or goods may be delivered to the buyer free from encumbrances, subject to the conditions stipulated in the Ports Law.

Separating Rescue Operations from Debris Removal

In maritime law, salvage operations and wreck removal are not the same process. According to Article 1298 of the Turkish Commercial Code, any act or action undertaken to rescue a distressed watercraft or other goods in navigable waters constitutes a salvage operation. Salvage aims to secure the distressed vessel, cargo, or other goods. If a beneficial outcome is achieved, the salvager is entitled to a salvage fee according to the terms and conditions.

Wreck removal usually comes into play after the salvage phase. When the ship can no longer be salvaged as a seaworthy vessel, or when its location poses a danger to navigation and the environment, the wreckage must be removed, broken up, transported, destroyed, or rendered harmless.

Whether an activity is salvage or wreck removal is important in the specific case. In salvage operations, the salvager's right to compensation is determined according to criteria such as the value of what was salvaged, the degree of success, the magnitude of the danger, the effort expended, and the contribution to preventing environmental damage. The Turkish Commercial Code also recognizes that in the case of ships posing a threat of environmental damage, the salvager may claim special compensation under certain conditions.

In debris removal, the fee usually consists of expenses incurred for fulfilling a public law obligation or within the scope of a service contract between the parties. If a public authority has removed the debris on its own initiative, the reasonable expenses incurred may be recovered from the shipowner. The Turkish Commercial Code stipulates that claims arising from salvage operations and debris removal are subject to a two-year statute of limitations, starting from the date the debris removal operation is completed.

Shipowner's Obligation to Remove Debris

In Turkish law, the primary responsibility for removing sunken and dangerous vessels within the port's administrative area rests with the shipowner and those involved with the vessel. According to Article 7 of the Ports Law, any grounded, partially submerged, sunken, abandoned, or derelict vessels and their cargo that pose a risk to life, property, or the environment, or that hinder the safety of navigation and voyages, must be removed or disposed of by the shipowner or captain within a period determined by the port authority. The initial period granted cannot exceed forty-five days.

The shipowner's responsibility is not limited to simply raising the vessel to the surface. Depending on the nature of the risk, it may require the removal of fuel and hazardous materials, marking of the wreckage, containment of environmental leaks, collection of ship parts, transportation of the wreckage to a safe location, or complete destruction. The Ports Regulations also hold ship owners responsible for the prompt removal, towing, or neutralization of sunken, partially sunken, or abandoned vessels.

The term "ship stakeholders" here may include the owner, charterer, operator, captain, agent, or other persons legally responsible for the vessel, depending on the nature of the incident. However, who ultimately bears the costs of removal will be determined by the legal obligation as well as the operating, charter, management, and insurance agreements between the parties.

In bareboat chartering, the technical and commercial operation of the vessel may be left to the charterer. However, the claims made by administrative authorities against the ship owner or registered operator, and the final sharing of costs between the parties, are different matters. After the owner is held liable to the public authority, they may seek recourse against the charterer or operator for breach of contract or negligent conduct.

Port Authority's Intervention Powers

Failure of the shipowner to fulfill their obligations within the stipulated time gives the public authority the right to intervene. If the vessel is flying a foreign flag, the specified period is notified to the authorities of the state where the vessel is registered, to the shipowner, and to the captain. If the addresses cannot be reached, an announcement is made in the international maritime bulletin. For Turkish-flagged vessels, notification is made to the shipowner or captain; if the addresses are unknown, an announcement is made in a national newspaper as specified by law.

The existence of a lien on the ship does not absolutely prevent the removal of the lien. The situation is reported to the enforcement office that imposed the lien. Due to technical or meteorological necessities, upon the owner's objection, the granted period may be extended, not once, but within the limits set by law, for a maximum of forty-five days.

If the relevant parties cannot be reached within the specified time, or if they refuse to remove the wreckage, the port authority is authorized to remove, have removed, dismantle, destroy, sell, or have sold the ship and its cargo. Expenses incurred up to the sale stage may be covered from public funds; however, these expenses are first deducted from the sale price. Any remaining amount is sent to the relevant enforcement file if there is a lien. The remaining amount is held in an escrow account in the name of the rightful owner for a specified period. The delivery of the sold property free from encumbrances aims to ensure the safe return of the wreckage to economic circulation.

In cases where there is a serious and imminent danger to navigation, life, property, or environmental safety, the port authority is not required to grant prior notice. Even if the vessel is subject to seizure, precautionary measures, or other court orders, the port authority may take necessary measures, including relocating the vessel to a safe place. This authority is based on the protection of life, the environment, and navigation safety before the interests of private creditors. The costs of these measures are primarily borne by the shipowner.

The Ports Regulations stipulate that the port authority may initiate rescue operations ex officio if drifting, grounding, fire, collision, or sinking poses a risk to navigation, life, property, and environmental safety. In non-emergency situations, the administration may act ex officio if the ship's owners do not request rescue within seventy-two hours.

Prioritizing Seized Ships and Wreck Removal

A ship being under seizure does not permit it to be held in port indefinitely under dangerous conditions. According to the Ports Regulations, an inspection is carried out by the port authority on ownerless, abandoned, derelict, or seized vessels. If risks to navigation, life, property, and the environment are identified, the ship may be relocated, its fuel may be unloaded, or other necessary measures may be taken.

The port authority may apply to the relevant enforcement authority for the sale of a vessel that is subject to provisional or definitive attachment and poses a significant risk. Seized vessels that have been waiting in the port administrative area for more than one year without crew, or for more than two years with crew, are considered to pose a significant risk.

The priority of wreck removal expenses is also regulated in the Turkish Commercial Code. When a grounded or sunken ship is removed by public institutions for reasons of navigational safety or marine environmental protection, the removal expenses are paid before all other ship claims. Thus, even if there are seafarer wages, salvage fees, port claims, ship mortgages, or other real rights, the public institution's mandatory removal expenses take precedence.

The basis of this regulation is that debris removal is not an activity solely for the benefit of the owner. Debris removal serves public interests such as navigation safety, environmental protection, and the continuity of port operations. Therefore, covering the costs primarily from the sale price ensures that the administration does not delay necessary interventions due to financial concerns.

Limitation of Liability for Debris Removal Costs

In maritime law, it is possible for a shipowner to limit their liability for certain maritime claims to an amount calculated based on the ship's tonnage. Article 1328 of the Turkish Commercial Code accepts the limitation of liability arising from maritime claims in accordance with the 1976 Convention on the Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims and its 1996 Protocol. This regime is also applied in cases where there is no foreign element involved.

However, Turkish law provides an important exception regarding salvage costs. Article 1331 of the Turkish Commercial Code stipulates that liability cannot be limited for claims listed in subparagraphs “d” and “e” of the first paragraph of Article 2 of the 1976 Convention. These subparagraphs relate to the costs of removing, destroying, or rendering undamaged a sunken, wrecked, grounded, or abandoned ship and its cargo.

Consequently, under Turkish law, it is generally not possible for the shipowner to invoke the general maritime claims limitation regime with regard to wreck removal costs. Even if the wreck removal cost exceeds the value of the ship or standard liability limits, the shipowner may still be held liable for all reasonable expenses.

While this approach is understandable from a public interest perspective, it creates a significant financial risk for shipowners. Especially for large container ships, tankers, or vessels posing an environmental hazard, the cost of wreck removal can reach hundreds of millions of dollars. Therefore, mandatory or comprehensive insurance coverage is of great importance in terms of the shipowner's ability to pay and the state's ability to recover costs.

Liability Arising from Environmental Pollution

Sunken ships are not only a physical obstacle to navigation. Fuel, oil, chemicals, hazardous cargo, or other pollutants on board can cause long-term damage to the marine environment. In this case, in addition to the obligation to remove the wreck, obligations to prevent, limit, and mitigate environmental pollution also arise.

In the event of a persistent oil spill from a tanker, a special international liability regime for oil pollution may apply; in cases of pollution from fuel on other vessels, liability for bunker oil may arise; and in cases involving hazardous and harmful substances, relevant international and national environmental regulations may be considered. The Bunker Oil Convention aims to provide adequate and effective compensation for pollution damages caused by oil carried as fuel on ships.

Claims for environmental damage are not the same as claims for wreck removal. The costs of cranes, divers, tugboats, and dismantling used to lift the ship from the seabed constitute wreck removal expenses. However, the costs of cleaning the sea, restoring coastlines, fishing losses, and environmental damage to third parties may constitute separate compensation items.

The shipowner's claim of faultlessness in the accident does not, in all cases, eliminate the administrative removal obligation. The wreck removal regime is mostly based on the legal and economic connection to the ship rather than on the principle of fault. If the accident was caused by the fault of another ship, pilot, shipyard, or port operator, the shipowner may seek recourse against the culpable parties after paying the costs.

2007 Nairobi Rubble Removal Convention

The Nairobi Convention aims to establish a common legal framework for the removal of hazardous wrecks beyond territorial waters and within the economic jurisdiction of a coastal state. The Convention empowers signatory states to report ship accidents, locate wrecks, conduct hazard assessments, mark wrecks, and remove them. States parties may also apply specific provisions of the Convention within their territorial waters and maritime areas through optional notification.

According to the agreement, the registered ship owner is, as a rule, strictly liable for the costs of locating, marking, and removing dangerous wreckage. The circumstances under which the owner may be relieved of liability are limited. Defenses such as war or an unavoidable natural event, the damage being caused entirely by the willful conduct of a third party, or negligence on the part of the responsible authority in the maintenance of navigational aids may be raised.

One of the most important features of the Nairobi Convention is the mandatory insurance system. Ships of 300 gross tons and above, flying the flag of a signatory state, must have insurance or financial security to cover their wreck removal liabilities. The convention requires the ship to carry a certificate issued by the competent state, and allows the injured state to directly apply to the insurer. This system reduces the risk of the shipowner being unable to recover wreck removal costs due to their company structure or financial situation.

The Convention provides a legal basis for a coastal state to intervene in the removal of debris that threatens its economic and environmental interests, without claiming ownership. The measures taken must be proportionate to the danger and must not go beyond what is necessary for the removal of the debris. While the registered owner is given the opportunity to remove the debris first, in emergency situations the affected state can intervene directly.

As of July 2026, there is no accession or ratification arrangement indicating that the Nairobi Convention has entered into force for Turkey. An official publication by the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure also states that Türkiye is not among the signatory states; national procedures are carried out within the framework of the Ports Law and related legislation.

Türkiye's non-participation in the Convention does not mean that Turkish authorities lack the power to remove wrecks in its territorial waters and port administrative areas. The Ports Law and Ports Regulation grant significant intervention powers. However, the inability to benefit from uniform international jurisdiction, compulsory insurance certificates, and direct litigation against insurers regarding foreign shipwrecks located in Türkiye's exclusive economic zone or areas outside its territorial waters may create a legal loophole.

Debris Removal Insurance and P&I Coverage

Wreck removal costs are typically covered under P&I insurance, often known in practice as protection and indemnity clubs. Hull and machinery insurance primarily covers physical damage to the vessel itself. P&I insurance, however, provides broader liability coverage, encompassing the shipowner's obligations to third parties, public authorities, and the environment.

The existence of P&I coverage does not mean that the insurer will cover all wreck removal costs without limit. Conditions such as wreck removal being mandatory under the policy or club rules, being requested by the competent authority, the costs being deemed reasonable, and the shipowner cooperating with the insurer may apply.

The shipowner's knowing abandonment of the vessel, unsafe operation, serious breach of classification and certification obligations, or entering into unreasonable contracts without the insurer's approval may lead to a coverage dispute. However, in incidents requiring urgent intervention by a public authority, the shipowner cannot be required to wait for the insurer's prior approval. The shipowner must inform the insurer promptly of the intervention and ensure that the costs are controllable.

States party to the Nairobi Convention have a mandatory insurance certificate and a direct application system to the insurer for vessels of 300 gross tons and above. The absence of a general mandatory wreck removal insurance system equivalent to the Nairobi model in Türkiye's national law, covering all vessels under the Ports Law, may lead to collection problems, particularly for uninsured, abandoned vessels, or vessels owned by single-vessel companies.

Debris Removal Contracts

The shipowner or administration may contract with specialist salvage and marine construction companies for the removal of the wreckage. These contracts must clearly define the scope of work, the level to which the wreckage will be removed, the fate of the parts and cargo, environmental safety, the work schedule, pricing, and risk sharing.

While fixed-price contracts allow for predetermined costs, unexpected conditions on the seabed, shipwreck, or the emergence of new environmental risks can lead to additional charges. Different models can be used, such as lump-sum payments, daily wages, payments based on equipment and personnel costs, or performance bonuses.

Sharing liability is crucial in the event that the lifting company causes damage to the environment or third parties. While the shipowner's primary obligation to public authorities continues, a right of recourse may arise for damages resulting from the contractor's technical fault. For this reason, it is essential that the contractor has professional liability and environmental insurance.

The contract should also specify who owns the metal, machinery, cargo, or other economic assets recovered from the wreckage. It is unacceptable for the salvage company to automatically acquire ownership of the wreckage. It may be agreed that the proceeds from the sale of scrap and other assets will be deducted from the removal costs.

Historical and Archaeological Shipwrecks

Not every sunken ship can be considered an ordinary commercial wreck. Wrecks with historical, military, cultural, or archaeological value are subject to a special protection regime. In the provisions of the Turkish Commercial Code regarding salvage, prehistoric, archaeological, or historical cultural artifacts found on the seabed are excluded from the definition of "goods" within the scope of salvage provisions.

Therefore, working on this historical shipwreck cannot be treated like commercial wreck removal or classical salvage operations. The Law on the Protection of Cultural and Natural Heritage, museum and conservation legislation, and permits from relevant public institutions apply. Cultural heritage principles take precedence in matters of preserving the shipwreck in situ, conducting scientific excavations, or transporting it to a museum.

The fact that gold, coins, weapons, or commercial cargo found in a shipwreck have high economic value does not mean that the wreck can be freely salvaged for commercial purposes. The archaeological context is as important as the ship itself. Unauthorized removal, dismantling, or sale of the artifacts may result in both administrative and criminal liability.

Wrecked warships also present special issues regarding state immunity, military cemetery status, and the rights of the flag state. The sinking of a warship does not, in any case, negate the flag state's claims of ownership and immunity. In cases involving wrecks containing human remains, the principles of dignity, grave inviolability, and international cooperation must also be observed.

Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, and Disputes

If the wreck is located within the Turkish port administrative area or Turkish territorial waters, the jurisdiction of the Turkish administrative authorities is clear. The port authority can issue orders, set time limits, and intervene on its own initiative if necessary, for navigation and environmental safety.

The scope of jurisdiction becomes more complex when the wreck is located outside Türkiye's territorial waters but in an area where its economic interests are affected. Flag state jurisdiction, the coastal state's environmental and economic rights, freedom of the high seas, and applicable international conventions are considered together. The importance of the Nairobi Convention becomes particularly apparent at this point.

In private law disputes arising from wreckage removal contracts, the parties may agree on the applicable law, the competent court, or arbitration. However, decisions made by the port authority regarding removal, transportation, destruction, or sale are administrative acts. The appeal route and the competent court against these acts are determined according to the nature of the act based on public authority.

When a public authority seeks reimbursement from the shipowner for expenses incurred in removing the debris, this can give rise to a debt dispute in addition to the administrative action. Whether the expenses were actually incurred, necessary, and proportionate to the danger is debatable. The shipowner may argue that the intervention was unnecessary or the cost was exorbitant; however, in cases of clear and imminent danger, the administration has broad discretionary power.

The Need for Regulation in Turkish Law

The Ports Law and Ports Regulation in Turkish law contain effective powers regarding dangerous and abandoned vessels in port administrative areas. In particular, the administration's authority to remove, transport, destroy, and sell the vessel, and the priority given to public removal costs, are important in terms of implementation.

However, regulations mainly focus on port administrative areas. There is a need for a more comprehensive system regarding the reporting, marking, removal, notification to foreign owners, and mandatory insurance coverage of hazardous wrecks located in maritime areas outside Türkiye's territorial waters.

While considering the option of joining the Nairobi Convention, Türkiye's position regarding the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and its maritime jurisdiction arguments can be preserved. During the accession process, it is possible to make appropriate declarations regarding the scope of application of the Convention, its dispute resolution provisions, and the option of extending it to territorial waters.

National law could also consider requiring wreck removal insurance or financial guarantees for Turkish-flagged vessels above a certain tonnage and foreign vessels arriving at Turkish ports. The right to apply directly to the insurer could reduce collection problems arising from abandoned and financially insolvent shipping companies.

Conclusion

The salvage and removal of sunken ships and wreckage is not merely a technical activity concerning the private property of the ship owner. The wreckage can affect maritime transport, the environment, ports, fisheries, coastal facilities, and the life and property of third parties. For this reason, the legal system strikes a special balance between property rights and the public interest.

The sinking of a ship does not automatically terminate ownership rights. While the owner retains their rights over the wreckage, they may also be liable for the risks posed by the wreckage and the costs of its removal. The fact that the ship is abandoned or has lost its economic value does not relieve the owner of their public law obligation to remove the wreckage.

In Turkish law, the owner and those involved with the vessel are primarily responsible for removing dangerous, sunken, partially sunken, abandoned, or derelict ships within the port's administrative area. The port authority may grant a maximum period of forty-five days; if those involved remain inactive, the authority may unilaterally remove, destroy, or sell the ship. In cases of serious and imminent danger, immediate intervention may be necessary even if there is an existing seizure order or court injunction.

Expenses incurred by public institutions for wreck removal for purposes such as navigational safety or environmental protection are paid before other claims on the vessel. Furthermore, under Turkish law, the shipowner cannot benefit from the general maritime claims limitation regime with regard to wreck removal expenses. This creates a burdensome but significant liability system for the shipowner in terms of public safety.

The Nairobi Convention provides a uniform international system for the reporting, marking, removal, strict liability of the registered owner, and mandatory insurance of hazardous wrecks. While Türkiye's national regulations regarding port administrative areas are important, the Convention model needs to be evaluated in terms of wrecks outside territorial waters and mandatory financial security.

An effective system to be developed in the future should include rapid administrative intervention, clear liability rules, mandatory insurance, direct application to the insurer, prioritization of environmental damage, and the protection of historical shipwrecks. This would prevent the burden of wreck removal costs from falling on the public while also ensuring stronger maritime safety and environmental protection.