For centuries, the Law of Salvage, as it evolved by the decisions of the admiralty courts, has provided a “liberal” salvage reward to all mariners who voluntarily come to the aid of those in distress, and who are successful in saving property. To most mariners “time is money” - the delay and added peril of a diversion for salvage is not appealing. The courts reasoned that by granting “liberal” salvage rewards they could encourage mariners to turn aside willingly, and without hesitation, to render assistance to vessels in distress. This incentive was not forgotten when the Salvage Convention of 1989 entered into force in July of 1996. Although the term “liberal” is no longer used, the concept has been preserved in Article 13 of the Salvage Convention, which requires the reward to “be fixed with a view to encouraging salvage operations." Regardless of the terminology, a “liberal” salvage reward still accomplishes that purpose and applies to both professional and “chance” salvors.

Before the “liberal” boost could be applied, the amount of the basic salvage reward had to be determined. Prior to the Salvage Convention of 1989, the courts would have done this by applying the 6-part test described by the Supreme Court in THE BLACKWALL (1869), to the facts of each case. However, since the Salvage Convention entered into force, the courts have been required to determine the amount of the basic reward “with a view to encouraging salvage operations” by applying the 10 “Criteria for Fixing the Reward” set forth in Article 13 of the Salvage Convention. The 6 familiar elements of THE BLACKWALL test have survived, but are now incorporated into 7 of the 10 criteria of the Salvage Convention. In no particular order of importance, the 10 criteria are:

(a) the salved value of the vessel and other property;

(b) the skill and efforts of the salvors in preventing or minimizing damage to the environment;

(c) the measure of success obtained by the salvor;

(d) the nature and degree of the danger;

(e) the skill and efforts of the salvors in salving the vessel, other property and life;

(f) the time used and expenses and losses incurred by the salvors;

(g) the risk of liability and other risks run by the salvors or their equipment;

(h) the promptness of the services rendered;

(i) the availability and use of vessels or other equipment intended for salvage operations;

(j) the state of readiness and efficiency of the salvor’s equipment and the value thereof.

The three “new” criteria contained in the Salvage Convention are found in

Items (b), (i), and (j) above. Item (b), requiring consideration of efforts to prevent environmental damage, is truly a new element to be considered. However, Items (i) and (j) are actually codifications of a concept long-recognized by admiralty courts – that professional salvors are entitled to an even more liberal salvage reward.

Traditionally, the admiralty courts have recognized the “favored status” of professional salvors - trained persons of considerable skill, who maintain vigilance, vessels and equipment at great expense, and who voluntarily provide a public service by facing great perils. For these attributes the courts have held that professional salvors are entitled to a “more liberal” reward than that of a mere casual or chance salvor. The courts have applied the “more liberal” concept not only to the largest professional seagoing salvage companies, but also to professional salvors of recreational vessels, and to part-time and seasonal salvors. Although this concept was not written into the 6-part test of THE BLACKWALL, the courts have usually added the uplift of the “more liberal” reward in a second step, after first determining the amount of the basic “liberal” reward.

With the adoption of the Salvage Convention, the “more liberal” reward for professional salvors has not been cast aside, but is merely calculated in a different manner. Rather than continuing the two-step process previously engaged in by the courts, the Salvage Convention has simply incorporated criteria addressing the professionalism of the salvor within the 10 criteria that must be considered in setting the reward in all salvage cases. Therefore, the “more liberal” reward to which professional salvors have always been entitled has survived the adoption of the Salvage Convention and can be relied upon to continue providing professional salvors with a “more liberal” reward, even if that rather confusing terminology should fade into history.