Can employment salvage payments be entitled to a maritime lien and allowed in the general average? A comparative analysis of the UK, US, and China

The International Convention on Salvage 1989 established the basic framework on the "no cure, no pay" principle and also allowed for freedom of contract. Employment salvage is defined as services performed under a contract to pay a given sum or per diem or horam wages, payable at all events, regardless of the salvage is successful or unsuccessful. This study provides a thorough analysis of the differences between employment salvage payments and "no cure, no pay" salvage rewards, identifying key distinctions in their legal natures, principles for calculating remuneration, and conditions of payment. By comparing the legal frameworks in the United Kingdom, the United States, and China, it is determined that claims for employment salvage payments should not be entitled to maritime liens. Moreover, if such claims satisfy the criteria of general average, they should be allowed in general average and contributed to by the relevant beneficiaries. To prevent the dilution of the "no cure, no pay" principle in maritime salvage due to the increased freedom of contract, this study advocates for a stricter scrutiny of contractual freedom in employed salvage to avoid potential abuses by salvors. It is crucial to balance the interests of salvors and other maritime stakeholders, ensuring that while salvors are incentivized for their risky work, other parties are also safeguarded against excessive or unwarranted financial burdens. Additionally, to reduce legal conflicts among nations, it is advisable for countries to coordinate their legislation and establish appropriate international guidelines to promote a greater harmonization of international maritime law.