Red Diesel

[AntarcticPilot]

I think the critical factor is the duration of the stay - a lot of these exemptions to local law which apply to foreign vessels relate to what is described in international law as "Innocent Passage". You can claim exemption from local laws if you are passing through, possibly including stopping briefly in port, but if you stay for any length of time, then you have to accept the local laws.

That's my understanding too. But I don't know where the boundary between innocently visiting the the EU and 'temporary importation' is.

"Innocent passage" does not include any stop in a harbour, except under duress. To be on innocent passage, your journey must start and end outside the territorial waters of the country concerned. Further, it doesn't include "internal waters", which in general means all waters inside the baseline - that is, the line joining prominent headlands and islands from which territorial waters are measured. For the UK, that inclides an awful lot of water, including most of the usual cruising grounds! There is a different general principle, though, where basically a country accepts that as long as a vessel follows the rules of its flag state, it will not be pursued for local rules. Comity, or something like that? I forget the exact name. But in general, that's a courtesy, NOT a rule, and there are plenty of exceptions.

 

[Blue Sunray]

"Innocent passage" does not include any stop in a harbour, except under duress. To be on innocent passage, your journey must start and end outside the territorial waters of the country concerned. Further, it doesn't include "internal waters", which in general means all waters inside the baseline - that is, the line joining prominent headlands and islands from which territorial waters are measured. For the UK, that inclides an awful lot of water, including most of the usual cruising grounds! There is a different general principle, though, where basically a country accepts that as long as a vessel follows the rules of its flag state, it will not be pursued for local rules. Comity, or something like that? I forget the exact name. But in general, that's a courtesy, NOT a rule, and there are plenty of exceptions.

+1

 

[lw395]

"Innocent passage" does not include any stop in a harbour, except under duress. To be on innocent passage, your journey must start and end outside the territorial waters of the country concerned. Further, it doesn't include "internal waters", which in general means all waters inside the baseline - that is, the line joining prominent headlands and islands from which territorial waters are measured. For the UK, that inclides an awful lot of water, including most of the usual cruising grounds! There is a different general principle, though, where basically a country accepts that as long as a vessel follows the rules of its flag state, it will not be pursued for local rules. Comity, or something like that? I forget the exact name. But in general, that's a courtesy, NOT a rule, and there are plenty of exceptions.

You are right , innocent passage is not the right term.
I'm not sure what the right term is, but I'm told there is a whole lot of international law about what a Port State can have jurisdiction over in a foreign vessel.
The point I was making was that a leisure vessel (e.g. US flagged) cruising around the EU as a temporary import status loses some of the privileges of a foreign commercial vessel simply arriving and departing.
A UK vessel is not foreign, for many purposes it is an EU vessel.

It's not a simple argument to pick with Belgian customs.

 

[chrishscorp]

It's not a simple argument to pick with Belgian customs.

Its an argument you will be picking with Belgian, French, German, Portugueese, Spanish, Italian and possibly Greek Customs. The ruling is in, there is no reason why any of them should not enforce it :ambivalence:

 

[awol]

Its an argument you will be picking with Belgian, French, German, Portugueese, Spanish, Italian and possibly Greek Customs. The ruling is in, there is no reason why any of them should not enforce it :ambivalence:

...... and it won't change if Brexit ever happens!

 

[Daydream believer]

The RYA will give the correct interpretation of the law regarding this. I did query the situation some time ago but no longer have the info.

 

[Blue Sunray]

Its an argument you will be picking with Belgian, French, German, Portugueese, Spanish, Italian and possibly Greek Customs. The ruling is in, there is no reason why any of them should not enforce it :ambivalence:

Actually there is, exactly the same one that stopped the recent Belgian enforcement, that is if the relevant authorities reckon the damage to the local economy from loss of business outweighs the benefits. I doubt that this will be the case in many places though and eventuality the EU will probably put pressure on for universal enforcement but that will be a long way off happening.

 

[Quandary]

I don't get this argument, as members of the EU the other countries are exercised by the apparent reluctance of one of their member countries to abide by their rules.
If a country is outside that collective why should they then take any interest in what is allowed domestically. If a visitor from that country complies with the EUs rules while there, what is their transgression. The fuel colour in the visitors tank is not a safety issue, not economic not anything that I can think off, it is no longer a transgression either so why should they be bothered?

Of course this is as pathetic an argument for Brexit as all the others.

 

[maby]

I don't get this argument, as members of the EU the other countries are exercised by the apparent reluctance of one of their member countries to abide by their rules.
If a country is outside that collective why should they then take any interest in what is allowed domestically. If a visitor from that country complies with the EUs rules while there, what is their transgression. The fuel colour in the visitors tank is not a safety issue, not economic not anything that I can think off, it is no longer a transgression either so why should they be bothered?

Of course this is as pathetic an argument for Brexit as all the others.

I guess that the justification would be that the local authorities could not distinguish between marked diesel purchased legally outside the EU and marked fuel purchased illegally while you are in EU waters.

 

[CLB]

I guess that the justification would be that the local authorities could not distinguish between marked diesel purchased legally outside the EU and marked fuel purchased illegally while you are in EU waters.

So thereby guilty unless proved innocent.

 

[Old Harry]

How long will it take to remove all the red marker from our tanks?

I think a forum search may well answer your queries, Red seems to have been the point of much discussion over the past few years

 

[Blue Sunray]

So thereby guilty unless proved innocent.

No - the offence is having marked diesel in ones tank, not tax/excise evasion. The intention of the law may well be to minimise the latter but that is not the actual offence in this case.