国际海运迟延交付规则研究

发布时间：2019-02-14 22:08

【摘要】： 海上货物运输中的迟延交付,一直是理论和司法界争论不休的一个重要问题。各国出于维护自身利益的需要,对迟延交付的规定难以统一。即使CMI拟定的《国际海上货物运输统一法草案》,也对迟延交付问题提供了不同的标准,以供各国选择。本文全面、深入分析了迟延交付的定义、确定标准、法律责任及法律救济问题,并阐述了我国迟延交付的审判及立法发展趋势,以便为解决此类纠纷提供一条正确途径。全文共分五章。第一章是有关迟延交付的定义问题。《海牙规则》和《海牙-威斯比规则》没有对迟延交付作出规定,《汉堡规则》是第一个规定迟延交付及其责任的国际公约。主要海运大国在实践中都认为迟延交付应包括所谓的合理时间。我国《海商法》吸收了《汉堡规则》的部分规定,将迟延交付定义为“货物未能在明确约定的时间内,在约定的卸货港交付的,为迟延交付。”该定义排除了“未在合理时间内交付的”迟延交付,因而带来一系列矛盾。如要根本解决这些问题,必须对迟延交付的定义进行修改。第二章讨论的是迟延交付的确定标准问题。除了约定时间,未在合理时间交货也应视为迟延交付。合理时间是一个事实问题,但大致可以从当事人运送货物的意思表示,承运人恪守职责,其他可预见的情况这三个方面来加以判断。第三章探讨的是承运人的迟延交付责任。即使因迟延交付需要承担责任,承运人还可以享受责任限制,包括海事赔偿责任限制和单位赔偿责任限制两种方式。本文详细论述了国际公约、相关国内法、以及我国《海商法》的承运人赔偿的范围、承运人单位责任限制制度和免责规定。同时指出,我国《海商法》“宽以待承运人,严以律收货人”的现状不利于平衡船货双方的利益,应该基于公平、公正的理念,提高承运人的损失赔偿限额,加重其迟延交付的不利后果。第四章研究的是收货人的法律救济问题。迟延交付发生后,收货人必定会采取措施以维护自己的利益,这于收货人是一种权利,于承运人而言是一种制裁。本文将收货人的法律救济纳入研究范畴,认为收货人可以视具体情况不同,给予承运人以宽限期、索赔、解除合同、认为货物灭失。第五章论述了我国迟延交付的审判及立法发展趋势。司法界倾向于只将未在约定时间交货看作是迟延交付,指导立法的理论界却普遍认为,未在合理时间交货也应视为迟延交付,并且应该提高承运人的赔偿限额,让其充分赔偿收货人的经济损失。
[Abstract]:Delay in delivery in the carriage of goods by sea has always been an important issue in the theoretical and judicial circles. In order to safeguard their own interests, it is difficult for countries to unify the provisions of delay in delivery. Even the draft uniform Law on the International Carriage of goods by Sea, prepared by CMI, provides different criteria for delay in delivery for countries to choose from. In this paper, the definition, standard, legal liability and legal remedy of delay delivery are comprehensively and thoroughly analyzed, and the development trend of trial and legislation of delay delivery in our country is expounded in order to provide a correct way to solve such disputes. The full text is divided into five chapters. The first chapter deals with the definition of delay in delivery. The Hague rules and the Hague-Visby rules do not provide for delay in delivery, and the Hamburg rules are the first international conventions providing for delay in delivery and its liability. In practice, major maritime powers agree that delay in delivery should include what is called a reasonable time. China's Maritime Law absorbs some provisions of the Hamburg rules and defines delay in delivery as "delay in delivery if the goods are not delivered at the agreed port of discharge within a specified time." This definition excludes late delivery without delivery within a reasonable time, thus leading to a series of contradictions. To solve these problems fundamentally, the definition of delay delivery must be revised. The second chapter deals with the determination of the criteria for delayed delivery. In addition to the agreed time, failure to deliver at a reasonable time shall also be deemed to be late delivery. Reasonable time is a matter of fact, but can be broadly judged from three aspects: the expression of the parties' intention to deliver the goods, the carrier's commitment to its duties, and other foreseeable circumstances. The third chapter discusses the carrier's responsibility for late delivery. Even if the carrier is liable for delay in delivery, the carrier can also enjoy limitation of liability, including limitation of maritime liability and limitation of unit liability. This paper discusses in detail the scope of the carrier's compensation, the limitation of the carrier's unit liability and the exemption from liability in international conventions, relevant domestic laws, and China's Maritime Law. At the same time, it is pointed out that the present situation of "waiting for the carrier and strictly regulating the consignee" in China's Maritime Law is not conducive to balancing the interests of both the ship and the cargo, and should be based on the concept of fairness and justice to raise the limit of the carrier's loss compensation. Accentuate the adverse consequences of delay in delivery. The fourth chapter studies the legal remedy of consignee. After the delay in delivery, the consignee must take measures to protect his own interests, which is a right for the consignee and a sanction for the carrier. This paper brings the legal relief of the consignee into the scope of study, and holds that the consignee may, depending on the specific circumstances, grant the carrier a grace period, claim for compensation, terminate the contract, and hold that the goods are lost. The fifth chapter discusses the trend of late delivery of trial and legislation in China. Judicial circles tend to regard delivery not being delivered at an agreed time as delay, while the theorists who guide legislation generally believe that failure to deliver at a reasonable time should also be regarded as late delivery and that the carrier's limit of compensation should be increased. Let it fully compensate the consignee's economic losses.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2008
【分类号】：D996.19

【相似文献】