Maritime Law Safety Security Operations Logistics UK: Legal Frameworks and Risk Management
Assessment Brief: Maritime Operations and Law (MOPS601) – Assessment 1 (2025/26)
Module Code: MOPS601 Module Title: Maritime Operations and Law Credit Value: 20 credits (Level 7) Module Leader: Professor [Your Name], UK Maritime Industry, Marine and Nautical Science College
Assessment Overview This assessment examines the intersection of maritime law with safety protocols, security measures, operational efficiency, and logistics management. It aligns with the module’s learning outcomes:
- LO1: Critically appraise international maritime conventions and UK legislation governing safety (e.g., SOLAS 1974), security (e.g., ISPS Code 2004), and logistics (e.g., Hague-Visby Rules).
- LO2: Analyse legal liabilities and risk management in maritime operations, including cyber threats, port security, and supply chain disruptions.
- LO3: Develop advisory recommendations supported by case law, statutes, and peer-reviewed research, demonstrating ethical and practical application.
Assessment Type: Summative Coursework (Individual Report/Scenario Analysis) Weighting: 50% of overall module mark Format: Written submission via Moodle (Turnitin-enabled for plagiarism detection). Word Limit: 2,500 words (excluding footnotes and bibliography). Exceeding the limit will result in a 10% penalty per 100 words over. Footnotes are for citations only and do not count towards the limit. A bibliography is mandatory. Submission Deadline: 13:00 UK time, Friday 14 February 2026 (late submissions incur a 5% daily penalty, capped at 100% deduction after 7 days). Feedback: Provisional marks and feedback available within 15 working days via Moodle; final marks confirmed after External Examiner review.
Instructions for Completion
- Select and answer TWO questions only from the four provided below. Each response should be structured as a professional advisory report or legal analysis, incorporating scenario application, critical evaluation, and recommendations.
- Use OSCOLA referencing for all citations (including pinpoint references for cases, statutes, and conventions). Direct quotes must be in quotation marks; paraphrasing requires attribution. Failure to cite properly may constitute poor academic practice or misconduct under the College’s Academic Integrity Policy.
- Structure your submission as follows:
- Cover page (anonymous: module code, assessment title, word count only – no student ID/name).
- Main body (divided clearly between Question 1 and Question 2 responses, with executive summaries for each).
- Consolidated bibliography (Harvard style recommended for secondary sources).
- Core reading: Maritime Operations Management (Bennett, 5th edn, 2023); International Maritime Security Law (Kraska and Pedrozo, 2020). Supplementary resources available on Moodle.
- Support: Formative feedback on a 600-word draft plan available via office hours (book via email). Workshops on legal research and scenario analysis run in Weeks 3 and 6.
Assessment Criteria/Rubric (Marked out of 100; thresholds: 70+ = Distinction; 60-69 = Merit; 50-59 = Pass; <50 = Fail)
| Criterion | Description | Weighting | Excellent (70-100) | Good (60-69) | Satisfactory (50-59) | Poor (<50) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge & Understanding (LO1/LO2) | Mastery of legal frameworks in safety, security, and logistics; accurate application to operations. | 40% | In-depth integration of conventions (e.g., ISPS, SOLAS) with recent developments (post-2020 cyber amendments); nuanced risk analysis. | Firm understanding of key laws; applies to scenarios with some depth. | Basic recall; minor errors in conventions or applications. | Inaccurate or incomplete; overlooks core elements like cybersecurity. |
| Analysis & Evaluation (LO2/LO3) | Critical assessment; logical recommendations; balanced perspectives. | 30% | Sophisticated critique (e.g., effectiveness of port security post-Brexit); evidence-based solutions. | Sound reasoning; identifies issues and proposes viable options. | Descriptive analysis; limited evaluation of alternatives. | Lacks depth; no critical insight. |
| Research & Referencing (LO3) | Quality and integration of sources; originality. | 15% | 10+ diverse sources (e.g., journals, IMO guidelines); impeccable OSCOLA. | 7-9 relevant sources; few referencing issues. | 5-6 sources; some inconsistencies. | <5 sources; major errors or absent. |
| Communication & Structure | Clarity, professionalism, report format. | 10% | Exemplary: concise, executive-style, error-free. | Clear and structured; minor lapses. | Readable but uneven; some grammatical issues. | Disorganised; frequent errors. |
| Practical Application & Ethics | Relevance to real-world operations; ethical considerations. | 5% | Innovative, ethical insights; zero plagiarism. | Practical with some ethical awareness. | Basic application; minor integrity flags. | Impractical; ethical oversights or plagiarism. |
Questions (Answer TWO only)
- “The ISPS Code 2004 has enhanced global maritime security, but its implementation in UK ports post-Brexit exposes vulnerabilities in supply chain logistics and cyber operations.” Critically evaluate this statement, referencing recent IMO amendments (2019–2025) and case studies from EU-UK trade disruptions.
- On 5 December 2025, the Global Voyager, a Singapore-flagged container ship operated by Pacific Logistics Ltd, arrives at Felixstowe Port, UK. During routine inspections under the Merchant Shipping Act 1995, authorities discover non-compliance with SOLAS Chapter V (safety of navigation) due to faulty AIS equipment, potentially linked to a cyber intrusion. The vessel carries hazardous cargo under IMDG Code, and a delay risks breaching Hague-Visby Rules timelines for delivery to EU buyers. Meanwhile, a suspected stowaway raises ISPS Level 2 security concerns. Advise the shipowner, port authority, and cargo interests on: (a) legal liabilities for safety breaches; (b) cybersecurity obligations under IMO guidelines; and (c) mitigation strategies for logistics disruptions.
- A UK-based shipping company, North Sea Traders, contracts for the carriage of perishable goods from Rotterdam to Liverpool on 20 January 2026. En route, the vessel encounters severe weather, invoking force majeure under the contract, but cargo damage occurs due to inadequate stowage, violating SOLAS stowage requirements. Port security at Liverpool flags potential smuggling, triggering ISPS protocols and delaying discharge. Discuss: (a) apportionment of liability under carriage laws; (b) interplay between safety regulations and security operations; and (c) remedies for supply chain interruptions.
- “Advancements in autonomous maritime systems (MASS) since 2019 challenge existing legal frameworks for safety (SOLAS) and security (ISPS), necessitating reforms in operational logistics to address attribution of cyber risks.” Assess this proposition, incorporating comparative insights from UK, IMO, and EU initiatives.
Academic Integrity Statement All work must be your own. Plagiarism, collusion, or contract cheating will result in a zero mark and referral to the Academic Conduct Panel. Resources: College Plagiarism Guide (Moodle).
Further Reading
- IMO Circulars: MSC.1/Circ.1595 (Cyber Risk Management, 2021 update).
- Recent cases: The Longchamp [2024] EWCA Civ 456.
If you have queries, contact the Module Leader at [email]. This assessment prepares you for real-world challenges in a sector critical to UK trade and security.
Suggested Peer-Reviewed References
These references focus on maritime law’s integration with safety, security, operations, and logistics, drawn from reputable journals and databases like Frontiers, Google Scholar, and academic presses, published between 2019 and 2025.
Kraska, J. and Pedrozo, R. (2020) International maritime security law. Leiden: Brill Nijhoff.
Ringbom, H. and Rosas, A. (2022) ‘Autonomous vessels: state of play and legal challenges’, The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, 37(1), pp. 121-149. doi: 10.1163/15718085-bja10072.
Soyer, B. and Tettenborn, A. (eds.) (2023) Cyber risks, insurance and the marine industry. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
Veal, R. and Tsimplis, M. (2025) ‘The integration of cybersecurity into maritime safety conventions: a post-2021 analysis’, Journal of International Maritime Law, 31(2), pp. 85-104.