Oil will not normally be ‘waste’ since it is not a residue and can be used as a fuel without further processing. But, in this case it was classified as having been ‘discarded’ and thus within the scope of the Directive. This is in line with an earlier decision where oil leaking from an underground petrol tank was held to have been ‘discarded’. On that basis, it did classify as ‘waste’. 



The importance of this is in the liability to pay for the clean-up. Here, it was held that the seller of the oil, as well as the charterer of the ship, could be deemed to be the ‘producer’ and ‘previous holder’ of the waste and thus liable for clean-up costs. Whether such liability would attach would depend upon the national courts (eg of England and Wales), but it does mean that there is now a potential liability within several EU jurisdictions if oil spills or leaks occur during transportation (even if the original producer is not directly responsible). One would expect the UK courts to be reluctant to attach liability in such cases (in contrast to the courts of France) but it does illustrate the potential scope of the waste regs. See Commune de Mesquer v Total [2008]. Source: DLA. © Practical Lawyer