Detention and Banning
Detention and refusal of access follow the applicable regional and national regime. Paris MoU 2025 detention counts contain an unresolved discrepancy in the official sources.
Operational Explanation
The progression in article 16 of Directive 2009/16/EC and the coordinated Paris MoU framework belong to their scope. Other MoUs and States may use different criteria, national bases and consequences; there is no invariant worldwide progression.
Regulatory Reference
Detention depends on the severity of deficiencies under the competent regime. The refusal-of-access thresholds described here are EU/Paris MoU rules: do not attribute them to Tokyo MoU without checking its rules. Paris MoU: Refusal of Access.
Under the regime preceding the 2027 amendments, Article 16 provides refusal after more than two detentions: 36 months for black-listed flags, 24 months for grey-listed flags. It takes effect when the ship leaves the port or anchorage of the third detention following release; distinguish that event from lifting the access ban.
The 3-, 12- and 24-month periods are minimums, not automatic expiry dates. Under the previous regime, a third refusal may be lifted after 24 months only with a flag outside the black/grey lists, certificates issued by the required recognized organizations, high Company Performance and fulfilment of Annex VIII conditions. Failure to meet the criteria after 24 months entails permanent refusal; detention following the third refusal also entails permanent refusal. Directive 2009/16/EC, Article 16.
Transfer to an appropriate repair yard under Article 21 requires conditions accepted by the authorities; it does not authorize independent departure. Under the previous regime, breaching conditions or failing to reach the agreed yard may entail refusal until full compliance is demonstrated. Exceptional entry for force majeure, safety or pollution reduction requires permission and adequate measures: it is not lifting the ban.
Directive 2024/3099 changes thresholds, lifting conditions and repair-yard provisions, with transposition by 6 July 2027. Do not reduce the changes to renamed lists or twelve months followed by automatic lifting. Check the applicable article, transition and national implementation on the call date. Directive 2024/3099.
Appeal: check national deadlines and procedures stated in the notice. Paris MoU detention review through flag/RO is distinct from national appeal and produces a non-binding opinion; do not treat it as permission to sail. Paris MoU: Appeal Procedures.
Scope of Application
Ships subject to the EU/Paris MoU refusal-of-access regime for the thresholds and progression described here. For any other region check the competent MoU, law and Authority decision. Refusal for failure to comply with repair-yard transfer conditions remains distinct.
Procedure / How to Complete It
- Identify port State and regional regime.
- Apply thresholds and periods only under the competent regime.
- Keep detention, refusal of access and repair-yard refusal distinct.
- Check notices, lifting conditions and national law.
Practical Example
Example: a ship detained for malfunction of the emergency generator. Technical intervention completed in 18 hours, class surveyor verification passed, PSC authority confirms release. The episode is analysed at the next Management Review, identifying the need to bring forward preventive maintenance of the generator across the whole fleet.
What Typically Goes Wrong
The official 2025 statistics page reports 668 detentions, 16,474 inspections and 19 refusals of access; it also publishes a detention rate of 4.18%. The PDF also contains 688 in its summary and 668 in its chart. The ratio 688/16,474 is consistent with 4.18%, but this is not an official correction. The ratio 668/16,474 is about 4.05%: the published figures do not reconcile and should not be presented as equivalent without source clarification. Paris MoU Annual Report 2025.
Common Mistakes Mistake Library
| Mistake | Consequence | How to avoid it |
|---|---|---|
| Treating every detention as automatically causing more frequent or detailed inspection | The profile is predicted without applying its calculation | Recalculate Ship Risk Profile and Company Performance under the competent regime |
| Describing refusal of access as a consequence of the second detention | The current EU/Paris MoU threshold for black/grey flags is applied too early | Apply Article 16 of Directive 2009/16/EC: more than two detentions in the relevant 36 or 24 months, hence an order after the third detention, with its own conditions; check the repair-yard case separately and the amendments applicable from 6 July 2027 |
What the PSCO Checks
Operational Tips
- Manage every detention with the utmost priority and transparency towards the PSC authority, to speed up verification and release.
- Always analyse the root cause of the detention in the SMS's NC/CAPA system, don't stop at the technical repair.
- Monitor the fleet's detention history against the banning thresholds, especially if the flag is on the Grey or Black List.
Preparation checklist
Educational checklist. This summary supports learning and preparation only. It does not replace the vessel’s approved procedures, manuals, statutory documents, company SMS, or applicable official requirements. Completing it demonstrates neither compliance nor readiness for an inspection: it shows that a list has been read, not that the ship is in order. Always verify the current documents carried on board.
- Deficiencies causing the detention identified and prioritised
- Coordination with Company, DPA and classification society initiated immediately
- Formal verification of rectifications requested before release
- Episode documented in the NC/CAPA system and brought to the Management Review
- Impact on Ship Risk Profile and Company Performance monitored over time
FAQ
Related Topics
Last substantive revision of this page: 16 September 2026 · page fingerprint 05649a36c629