5.1 Current system for mutual recognition
Following the coming into force of Article 10(1) came, the EU RO Mutual Recognition Group (EU RO MR Group) was established and this has gradually refined a scheme for mutual recognition of class certificates. This framework rests on a “safety pyramid” concept, categorising items by safety criticality level. In practice, the EU ROs focus on low-risk products, establishing common requirements for materials, equipment, and components deemed “appropriate” for mutual recognition (e.g., relatively simple items such as certain non-critical mechanical parts).(1) Report from the Commission to Parliament and Council, COM(2015) 382 final, cit. above. The consolidation of rules for an eligible item is carried out following the principle of the “most stringent and rigorous standards”. Although EU ROs have different rules, a common ground has been reached, which has led to the elaboration and adoption of the Technical Requirements (TRs) and the Product Evaluation Process (PEP).
To assess which items are “appropriate” for mutual recognition, the EU ROs have used IMO (MSC.1/Circ.1464)(2) https://webaccounts.imo.org/Common/WebLogin.aspx?App=IMODOCS and classification rules (IACS UI SC 134)(3) https://iacs.org.uk/resolutions/ui-sc/ui-sc134-new/ui-sc134-new as a basis, which categorise essential and non-essential ship systems based on safety criticalities and scientific assessments. These references provide an objective standard for safety impact. Under this scheme, if a product meeting the TRs is assessed and certified, it should then in theory be accepted by all other EU ROs without further testing. However, each EU RO may refuse recognition for “serious safety reasons” if it documents such concerns.
This approach acknowledges that some products are ill-suited mutual recognition. High-risk or complex products remain subject to each EU RO’s individual assessment. Although this implementation has proven workable for select product categories and is endorsed by the European Commission, expanding it to complex items remains contentious.(4) See, for example, report from Technical Review Meeting Report 21 November 2024, https://www.euromr.org/stakeholder-relations