海难救助相关法律问题研究

发布时间：2018-02-23 04:50

本文关键词： 海难救助标的救助款项救助报酬主体　出处：《中国海洋大学》2013年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：海上运输不确定因素很多，相比其他运输方式有着更大的风险，虽然现代科技的快速发展使航海技术日趋完善，但海难事故时有发生。公元前900年的罗德海法中已经有“对海难救助者，得享有救助物五分之一权利”的记载。经过多个世纪后，海商法中关于海难救助制度虽然不断完善.从传统的“无效果无报酬”原则到《1989年国际救助公约》的“特别补偿条款”，到船东互保协会设置的SCOPIC条款。救助目的已经从单纯的保护航行安全发展到保障航行安全和保护环境的双重目的。海难救助法律的发展必然体现为海难救助行为构成的变化。本文在注重我国海难救助立法和国际海难救助立法趋势研讨的同时，亦对传统的海难救助理论进行反思,通过比较海难救助行为理论和实践的异同，以达到海难救助完善立法的目的，进而为海事实践提供借鉴。海难救助制度的设立的初衷是为了鼓励海上救助。在人类航行之初，尚不存在现代化的船只和用具，救助标的单一，仅限于船舶和所载货物，对人命的救助也只是道义上的责任。随着科学技术的发展，救助标的多元化，一些类似船舶的物也可成为救助标的。但在判定中，要结合此物所处的地理位置或设置此物的目的来决定。人命救助是否能成为救助标的历来颇受争议，但现代的的立法趋势是把人命作为独立的救助标的。因为人们的价值既然无法用金钱来衡量，那么其救助人命的报酬就不应该依附于财产。环境涉及公益，既然环境能够得到特别补偿，那么救助人命也应得到特别补偿。此种补偿机制早在19世纪英国的商船法中有所规定，并且在此部法律中，还规定了人命报酬的优先权，此种做法给了我们良好的借鉴。现代运输日趋发达，大型船舶和油轮在海上运输中起着越来越重要的作用。但是此类船舶一旦遇难，救助作业将十分困难，并且救助方还要受“无效果，无报酬”原则的约束，如果救助失败，则救助费用都不会得到补偿。此外，特别是大型油船污染环境严重，环境又涉及公共利益，为了鼓励救助方努力救助环境，特别补偿应运而生。但此制度的设立最根本的的目的在于补偿，而不是盈利。特别补偿最多能达到救助环境所用费用的百分之二百。我国海商法对救助报酬权利主体和救助报酬义务主体的规定不明确。对救助权利主体的规定是“救助报酬请求权的主体是实施海难救助的人。”对救助义务主体的规定是“获救的船舶和其他财产各所有人。”如果救助方实施救助是自身义务的，则无救助报酬请求权，如传统上认为被救船舶的船员无救助报酬请求权，但实践中有被救助船的船员有救助报酬请求权的例外情形，，法律却没有规定。通过对海上旅客运输中规定的旅客的权利和义务来看，旅客应享有救助报酬请求权。虽然现代船舶复杂化，受过专业训练的船员一般都不能成功救助船舶，旅客救助成功的情形更是罕见，但把旅客界定为适格的救助主体还是有一定的实践意义的。难船获救，挽回损失，所有受益主体都应有支付救助报酬的义务。但法律仅规定了直接受益主体有支付救助报酬的义务，对间接受益主体却没有规定。如获救船舶的光船租赁人比船舶所有人更应支付救助报酬，因此时如果船舶灭失，遭受损失最大的是光船租赁人，而非船舶所有人，所以对救助报酬支付主体的厘定就十分有必要。
[Abstract]:Maritime transport many uncertain factors, compared to other modes of transport have a greater risk, although the rapid development of modern science and technology makes the navigation technology is becoming more and more perfect, but accidents have occurred. "Have to salvage them in 900 BC Rhodes in Haifa, have saved 1/5 help right" records. After more than a century later, a maritime law of salvage at sea is constantly improving. From the traditional "no effect no pay" principle to the <1989 international rescue convention > "special compensation clause" to the terms of the SCOPIC Shipowners Mutual Assurance Association set up. To rescue has sailed from the development to safeguard and protect the safety of the dual purpose the safety of navigation and protect the environment.
The development of marine salvage law must reflect changes in the structure for salvage behavior. The article focuses on China's legislation and international salvage salvage legislative trends in research at the same time, also to the traditional salvage theory of reflection, through the comparison of salvage behavior theory and practice, in order to salvage legislative purpose, and to provide reference for the maritime practice.
Salvage system is designed to encourage the salvage. In human early modern ships and appliances that do not yet exist, only a single subject of salvage, ship and cargo to life rescue is moral responsibility. With the development of scientific technology, diversified relief standard, some similar ships may also become the subject of salvage. But in the judgment, to the location with it or set it to decide. Whether can become the subject of salvage salvage has been controversial, but the legislative trend is to modern life as an independent subject of salvage because people. Since the value can not be measured by money, so the rescue reward should not depend on the property. The environment relates to public interest, since the environment can get special compensation, so save life should also be such special compensation. The compensation mechanism was stipulated in the merchant shipping law of the UK in the early nineteenth Century, and in this law, the priority of human life remuneration is also provided. This practice has provided us with good reference.
Modern transportation is developed, large ships and oil tankers plays an increasingly important role in marine transportation. But these ships once killed, the salvage operation will be very difficult, and also by the salvor "no results, no pay" principle of constraints, if the rescue failed, then salvage charges will get compensation. In addition, special large oil tanker is a serious pollution of the environment, the environment and involved in the public interest, in order to encourage the salvor to help the environment, the special compensation came into being. But the most fundamental establishment of the system of the purpose of compensation, rather than profit. Special compensation can reach up to two hundred percent of the cost for environmental assistance.
Our maritime law of salvage rights and obligations of the salvage reward is not clear. The provisions of the relief right subject is "the main reward request right relief is the implementation of salvage." "the ship or other property salved all the provisions on the main duty to rescue." if the salvor to implement assistance is their obligations, no salvage rights, such as traditionally saved by the ship's crew no salvage rights, but in practice there are rescue ship crew exceptions salvage rights, the law has not stipulated. The rights and obligations of the provisions of the passengers in the carriage of passengers by sea see, visitors should enjoy the salvage rights. Although the modern ship complex, trained crew can not successfully rescue ship, passenger rescue success rate is rare, but the journey Customer is defined as the proper assistance subject still has some practical significance. And then rescued, to recoup their losses, all beneficiaries should pay remuneration for salvage duty. But the law only provides direct beneficiaries pay remuneration for salvage duty, but there is no provision on the indirect benefit subject. If rescued the bareboat charterer of the vessel more than the owner of the ship shall pay remuneration for salvage, so if the loss of the ship, suffered the biggest loss is the bareboat charter, rather than the owner of the ship, so to determine the salvage reward payment subject is very necessary.

【学位授予单位】：中国海洋大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：D996.19

【相似文献】