The Law of Ukraine ‘On Sea Ports’ has been sent back to the Verkhovna Rada

всего: 0 07.12.11

The draft law on ports provides to define that the use of water of the water objects for the needs of sea and river vessels is not referred to some special water use. However, Mr. Yanukovich considers that water use for the navigation cannot be referred to the general use as the general water use covers swimming, boat sailing, fishery etc. Mr. Yanukovich highlights that the law on ports stipulates introduction of a new type of water use (other than the type provided by the Water Code of Ukraine): water use of the water areas of sea ports. However, the law does not define the mechanism for such water use (pay principle for the water use, legal regime for the water use and water conservation, reconstitution of the water resources within the limits of the water basin of sea ports, requirements towards administrations of the sea ports related to the water use etc.). The President also noted the non-compliance of the provisions of the law on ports with the land legislation. For example, the Land Code links the land plot allotment to delimitation of frontiers in kind, while the law on ports links the land plot allotment to coordinates of the limits of the allotted sea port water basin. Mr. Yanukovich observes that the law on the ports does not cover the requirements defined by the basic legal framework. Besides, the law on ports does not provide the mechanisms for implementation of the provisions stipulated herein; accordingly it may cause numerous problems and improper use due to the diverse application of the law. Moreover, the law on ports stipulates that the premises for the check points through the customs border shall be provided by the administration of the port or owner of the sea terminal to the state authorities into the lease that is unacceptable as the state control (ecological, cross border, customs, sanitary and quarantine) on border protection is to be provided free of charge. In addition, the law on ports defines that the port infrastructure objects within the limits of the sea ports are privatized pursuant to the legislation on privatization considering the peculiarities provided by this law (Part I Article 12). At the same time the concept for privatization of such objects is not balanced. The President also noted that the requirement of the law on reorganization of the sea ports within 10 months from the date of the law publication by way of their division, their exclusion from the list of the companies not being subject to privatization may cause some risks related to abuse and loss of the port infrastructure objects providing vital activity of the state in the whole. Thus, Mr. Yanukovich concluded that the law entails some other remarks, including the conceptual ones. Accordingly, it may lead to numerous legal collisions, cause problems in legal regulation of the corresponding relations. Basing upon the abovementioned the President decided to reject the bill. Just to remind you that on the 3rd of November 2011 the Verkhovna Rada adopted the draft law ‘On Sea Ports of Ukraine’ that had been considering for the latest 9 years. It is supposed that the law will simplify the PPP in the ports and shall lead to attraction of the investments into the port sector.

  • Interlegal lawyers represent successfully the Client’s interests upon bankruptcy case proceedings2020.10.15

    Interlegal Client found out that its Debtor initiated independently bankruptcy case proceedings. Interlegal lawyers got involved upon expiry...

    show more
  • Mission possible: to release vessel with cargo on board within 3 days2020.10.06

    In high-peak trading season, each trader is focused on fulfilling its obligations as the counteragent, having completely forgotten that the...

    show more
  • Lawfulness of bunkering operations outside the 12-mile zone2020.10.01

    The Client filed a request to Interlegal concerning law regulations of bunkering operations outside the 12-mile zone. Interlegal law team...

    show more
  • Shareholder Agreement for new business setup2020.09.30

    The Client filed a request to Interlegal for legal support in business setup jointly with his new partner. Main task for Interlegal team...

    show more
  • Debt recovery under LMAA award. Act III: final stage2020.09.28

    We are glad to inform that Interlegal team has completed proceedings on debt recovery from the vessel owner who failed to refund to our Clie...

    show more
  • Interlegal team won GAFTA Arbitration under the dispute concerning short-payment for goods by the Swiss company2020.09.28

    Interlegal completed successfully GAFTA Arbitration under the dispute concerning short-payment for corn supplied on DAP terms, Chernomorsk S...

    show more
  • Interlegal lawyers succeeded in dispute settlement between the Shipowner and the Charterer2020.09.03

    The Client applied to Interlegal upon the issue of shipowner’s potential bringing to responsibility for non-performance of the Charter Party...

    show more
  • Interlegal won the court dispute against large state-owned stevedore2020.09.08

      The Client – port operator – applied to Interlegal for due diligence of one of state-owned stevedores. Such due dil...

    show more
  • Discharge of cargo residues and washwater: instruments of legal defense for Interlegal client2020.09.04

      Since the State Enterprise “Ukrainian Sea Ports Authority” (USPA), jointly with other governmental bodies (such as the State Borde...

    show more
  • Interlegal defended interests of “thyssenkrupp Materials Trading GmbH” in Court of Appeal of Donetsk2020.09.03

    Recently, in Court of Appeal of Donetsk there was a hearing of a case concerning an appeal against the ruling of Kramatorsk Town Court of Do...

    show more