Maritime Pilotage

• Author: Edgar Gold; Aldo Chircop; Hugh M. Kindred; William Moreira
• Pages: 729-747

729

CH AP TER 16

M AR ITIME PILOTAGE

A. INTRODUC TION

When a ship comes from the high seas, or is engaged in coastal trade,

or approaches port and enters harbour, or moves port-to-port, or even

berth-to-berth, local knowledge of the area is essential to avoid accidents.

Harbour authorities have the power to make local rules for maritime

traff‌ic1 within their jurisdiction and these local rules take precedence

over the international rules for preventing collisions, discussed in Chap-

ter 19.2 Naturally, masters and off‌icers of commercial and large recrea-

tional vessels cannot be expected to know the navigation rules of every

harbour at which they may call on their voyage. Their ships must, there-

fore, engage the services of local pilots to guide them when entering or

leaving a port, or navigating therein, or through other conf‌ined waters

such as inland waterways.

The pilotage system in Canada dates from 1873 when the Govern-

ment of Canada enacted the Pilotage Act.3 This legislation was based on

pilotage provisions as set out in the United Kingdom’s Merchant Shipping

1 See, for example, Transport Canada, “Victoria Harbour Traff‌ic Scheme” (1 April

2004), online: www.tc.gc.ca/eng/pacif‌ic/marine-1521.html.

2 Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972,

20 October 1972, 1050 UNTS 16, r 1; see also the Canadian equivalent Collision

Regulations, CRC, c 1416, s 3.

3 1873, 35-36-37 Vict, c 54.

PART V: MAR ITIME SERVICES730

Act.4 The Pilotage Act established the pilotage districts of Montreal,

Quebec, Halifax, and Saint John and allowed for the creation of further

pilotage districts in other parts of Canada as the need arose. Compul-

sory pilotage was not established through the provisions of the Act. The

Act was subsequently incorporated into the Canada Shipping Act.5

In the 1960s the issue of pilotage was examined by a Royal Commis-

sion on Pilotage.6 The result of the Commission’s f‌indings was ultimately

the enactment of a new and separate piece of legislation, the Pilotage

Act.7 The new Pilotage Act was enacted because the pilotage legislation

in the Canada Shipping Act was considered to be “seriously out-of-date,

unnecessarily complicated, obscure and ambiguous and, in some re-

spects, incomprehensible to those who must implement it.”8 Thus the

Act modernized pilotage law and empowered pilotage authorities to en-

act regulations for their regions. The Act also served to create a system of

compulsory pilotage in various areas.

There are certain ports and harbours where pilotage is not compul-

sory, and in those ports where pilotage is compulsory, certain vessels

are exempted, such as warships, small crafts, and ferries.9 The decision

to employ a pilot or not may be a question of due care in the circum-

stances. In a case where pilotage is not compulsory, a ship’s master can

be held negligent if his failure to do so contributed to the accident.10

Where pilotage is compulsory, any movement of the ship within the

pilotage area necessitates the utilization of a pilot.11

It should be noted that pilotage is not regulated internationally. The

principal organization representing most national pilotage groups is the

International Maritime Pilots’ Association (IMPA), located in London,

4 An Act to Amend Various Laws Relating to Merchant Shipping, 1853 (UK), 16 & 17

Vict, c 131.

5 Canada Shipping Act, RSC 1906, c 113.

6 Royal Commission on Pilotage, Report of the Royal Commission on Pilotage (Ot-

tawa: Queen’s Printer, 1968) [Commission on Pilotage].

7 SC 1970-71-72, c 52. The current version is RSC 1985, c P-14. All subsequent

references to the Pilotage Act, unless otherwise noted, are to the current version.

8 Commission on Pilotage, above note 6, Part 1 at 458.

9 The listing of ships to make them subject to compulsory pilotage or waiver of

pilotage is provided in a pilotage authority’s regulations. See, for instance, Atlantic

Pilotage Authority Regulations, CRC, c 1264, ss 4 & 5 [APAR]. See also Navigation

Madeleine Inc v Canada (AG), 2005 FCA 10, where a ship was determined to be a

“ferry” and as such exempt from the provisions of compulsory pilotage.

10 Alletta (The), [1965] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 479.

11 R v Fernandez (1980), 29 Nf‌ld & PEIR 361 (Nf‌ld SCTD) and see offences under

the Pilotage Act, above note 7, s 47.