지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
In Korean Commercial Code(“KCC”), in the carriage of goods by sea, the carrier may nonetheless be relieved of liability for damages to the cargo resulting from fire, unless such fire is caused intentionally or negligently by the carrier(the "Fire Exemption"), or damages to the cargo resulting from an act of the master, mariner, pilot or other employee of the vessel in the navigation or the management of the vessel (the "Navigation Fault Exemption").
And, even if a carrier is liable for damages to the cargo for his failure to exercise due diligence regarding the Duty of Seaworthiness and the Duty of Care for Cargo, his liability is limited to a certain extent. Under the KCC, the carrier's liability is limited to 500 Special Drawing Rights per package or unit.
But, regarding the obligations of the carrier in the carriage of goods by sea, the exceptions to liability resulting from error in navigation or management of the ship or from fire on the ship, unless caused by the fault or privity of the carrier, is in dispute that the exceptions are out of date, especially when considering the technical progress in navigation techniques and shipbuilding techniques.
And recently, during the sessions to work on a new instrument on the carriage of goods by sea by UNCITRAL's Working Group Ⅲ, these issues are come into the dispute again.
During the tenth session on Sep. 2002, it was widely expressed that the removal of Navigation Fault Exemption from the international regime governing carriage of goods by sea would constitute an important step towards modernizing and harmonizing international transport law. And after discussion, the Working Group decided that Navigation Fault Exemption should be deleted.
And for the Fire Exemption, after discussion, the Working Group decided to maintain it with some variations.
But as one of the world's biggest shipping country, Korea must keep in mind that the liability of ocean carriers should not be considerably increased to protect nation's shipping business.
And also, it should be remembered that if these exemptions are removed, there would be a considerable change to the existing position regarding the allocation of the risks of sea carriage between the carrier and the cargo interests, which would be likely to have an economic impact on insurance practice and confusion on shipping business.
And, even if a carrier is liable for damages to the cargo for his failure to exercise due diligence regarding the Duty of Seaworthiness and the Duty of Care for Cargo, his liability is limited to a certain extent. Under the KCC, the carrier's liability is limited to 500 Special Drawing Rights per package or unit.
But, regarding the obligations of the carrier in the carriage of goods by sea, the exceptions to liability resulting from error in navigation or management of the ship or from fire on the ship, unless caused by the fault or privity of the carrier, is in dispute that the exceptions are out of date, especially when considering the technical progress in navigation techniques and shipbuilding techniques.
And recently, during the sessions to work on a new instrument on the carriage of goods by sea by UNCITRAL's Working Group Ⅲ, these issues are come into the dispute again.
During the tenth session on Sep. 2002, it was widely expressed that the removal of Navigation Fault Exemption from the international regime governing carriage of goods by sea would constitute an important step towards modernizing and harmonizing international transport law. And after discussion, the Working Group decided that Navigation Fault Exemption should be deleted.
And for the Fire Exemption, after discussion, the Working Group decided to maintain it with some variations.
But as one of the world's biggest shipping country, Korea must keep in mind that the liability of ocean carriers should not be considerably increased to protect nation's shipping business.
And also, it should be remembered that if these exemptions are removed, there would be a considerable change to the existing position regarding the allocation of the risks of sea carriage between the carrier and the cargo interests, which would be likely to have an economic impact on insurance practice and confusion on shipping business.
목차
Ⅰ. 머리말
Ⅱ. 면책 및 책임제한제도의 내용
Ⅲ. 면책과 책임제한제도에 대한 연혁적 고찰
Ⅳ. 해상운송인의 면책 및 책임제한제도에 대한 비판과 그 분석
Ⅴ. 결론 및 제안
참고문헌
〈Abstract〉
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청이 논문과 연관된 판례 (1)
-
대법원 2002. 12. 10. 선고 2002다39364 판결
[1] 상법 제788조 제2항 본문 및 단서에서의 `화재`란, 운송물의 운송에 사용된 선박 안에 발화원인이 있는 화재 또는 직접 그 선박 안에서 발생한 화재에만 한정되는 것이 아니고, 육상이나 인접한 다른 선박 등 외부에서 발화하여 당해 선박으로 옮겨 붙은 화재도 포함한다고 해석된다.
자세히 보기
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
UN UNCITRAL 運送法會議에서 運送人의 責任制度
한국해법학회지
2005 .01
-
항해과실면책의 생성과 변화에 관한 고찰
무역학회지
2014 .02
-
國際海上運送과 航海過失免責
한국해법학회지
2011 .01
-
국제항공화물의 운송 지연에 대한 항공운송인의 책임
중재연구
2004 .01
-
개정상법상 해상물건운송인의 손해배상책임에 관한 고찰
경영법률
2011 .01
-
해상법상 손해배상책임 제도의 문제점
한양법학
2011 .11
-
해상운송에 있어서 화재에 대한 책임
한양법학
2009 .08
-
SHIPPERS’ RESPONSIBILITY UNDER DRAFT CONVENTION ON THE CARRIAGE OF GOODS WHOLLY OR PARTLY BY SEA
인하대학교 정석물류통상연구원 학술대회
2008 .03
-
해상물건운송인의 책임
경영법률
2006 .01
-
商法 航空運送編 制定試案의 問題點 檢討
기업법연구
2008 .09
-
國際運運條約上의 運送人 責任增加와 保險에 관한 硏究
산업경제연구
1993 .11
-
항공화물운송인의 책임에 관한 국제협약과 국내입법의 비교연구
한국항공우주정책·법학회지
2009 .01
-
해상운송법제상 상업용 수상무인선박과 해상운송인의 면책사유에 관한 고찰
해사법연구
2019 .01
-
여객의 인적 손해에 관련된 해상운송인의 손해배상책임에 관한 비판적 검토
기업법연구
2014 .06
-
The Liability Regime of the Air Carrier for Delay in the Carriage by Air
문화산업연구
2004 .06
-
상법상 항공운송인의 물건운송에 대한 손해배상책임 규정 검토
기업법연구
2011 .12
-
항공화물운송에 관한 상법 항공운송편 제정안의 내용 및 쟁점
무역상무연구
2009 .08
-
몬트리올 협약상 국제항공화물운송에 관한 연구 : 항공화물운송장과 항공운송인의 책임을 중심으로
무역상무연구
2011 .02
-
海上運送法에서 契約自由의 原則과 그 制限
기업법연구
2004 .12
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-366-017114518