국제운송에 있어서 계약운송인과 실제운송인의 법적 책임
On the Legal Liabilities of Contracting Carrier & Actual Carrier in the International Carriage of Goods by the Maritime Law
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The Hamburg Rules define, ‘contracting carrier’ refers to any person by whom or in whose name a contract of carriage of goods by sea has been concluded with a shipper. Under the same Rules, ‘actual carrier’ means any person to whom the performance of the carriage of goods, or of part of the carriage, has been entrusted by the carrier,and includes any other person to whom such performance has been entrusted. All the provisions of this Rules governing the responsibility of the contracting carrier also apply to the responsibility of the actual carrier for the carriage performed by the carrier. Where the performance of the carriage or part thereof has been entrusted to an actual carrier, whether or not in pursuance of a liberty under the contract of carriage by sea to do so, the contracting carrier nevertheless remains responsible for the entire carriage according to the provisions of this Rules. The Hamburg Rules explicitly hold that a contracting carrier is responsible, in relation to the carriage performed by the actual carrier, for the acts and omissions of the actual carrier and of his servants and agents acting within the scope of their employment. The actual carrier is responsible for loss, damage or delay in delivery caused by an occurrence which takes place while the goods are in his charge. Under the Korean Maritime Law, following the regulations of Hamburg Rules,the regulations as relates to a carrier can be applied to an actual carrier. However, due to the lack of precedence and inadequacies in legislation, in addition to the lack of relevant judicial review, many dispute often arise from the issues which are presented in this article.
Abstract
The Hamburg Rules define, ‘contracting carrier’ refers to any person by whom or in whose name a contract of carriage of goods by sea has been concluded with a shipper. Under the same Rules, ‘actual carrier’ means any person to whom the performance of the carriage of goods, or of part of the carriage, has been entrusted by the carrier,and includes any other person to whom such performance has been entrusted. All the provisions of this Rules governing the responsibility of the contracting carrier also apply to the responsibility of the actual carrier for the carriage performed by the carrier. Where the performance of the carriage or part thereof has been entrusted to an actual carrier, whether or not in pursuance of a liberty under the contract of carriage by sea to do so, the contracting carrier nevertheless remains responsible for the entire carriage according to the provisions of this Rules. The Hamburg Rules explicitly hold that a contracting carrier is responsible, in relation to the carriage performed by the actual carrier, for the acts and omissions of the actual carrier and of his servants and agents acting within the scope of their employment. The actual carrier is responsible for loss, damage or delay in delivery caused by an occurrence which takes place while the goods are in his charge. Under the Korean Maritime Law, following the regulations of Hamburg Rules,the regulations as relates to a carrier can be applied to an actual carrier. However, due to the lack of precedence and inadequacies in legislation, in addition to the lack of relevant judicial review, many dispute often arise from the issues which are presented in this article.
참고문헌 (36)
- 김인현, "해상법연구" (2002), 삼우사
- 박용섭, "해상법론" (1998), 형설출판사
- 손주찬, (2001), 한국사법행정학회
- 이기수, (2003), 박영사
- 이주흥, "해상운송법" (1992), 박영사
- 채이식, (2001), 박영사
- 최기원, "해상법" (2002), 박영사
- 김동훈, "定期傭船契約에 대한 法的 檢討", 한국해법학회지, 24(2), pp.11~44 (2002), 한국해법학회
- 김선옥, "운송인의 특정을 위한 다양한 해석에 관한 고찰", 무역학회지, 30(4), pp.141~160 (2005), 한국무역학회
- 金性倬, "周旋業者의 介入權", 기업법연구, 12, pp.275~297 (2003), 한국기업법학회
- 김인현, "상법 제806조 및 제789조의2에 대한 大法院判決 評釋", 상사판례연구, 18(3), pp.319~348 (2005), 한국상사판례학회
- 김인현, "상법 제806조의 적용에 대한 법적 검토", 한국해법학회지, 24(1), pp.193~222 (2002), 한국해법학회
- 김인현, "運送周旋人의 다양한 法的 地位에 따른 法律關係 － 海上運送周旋人을 중심으로 －", 안암법학, 통(26), pp.213~247 (2008), 안암법학회
- 傅廷中, "海上貨物運送에서 實際運送人의 責任에 관한 硏究", 한국해법학회지, 27(2), pp.339~356 (2005), 한국해법학회
- 유중원, "국제운송에 있어서 운송주선인의 지위와 판례정리", 변호사, 35 (2005), 서울지방변호사회
- 이광후, "화주의 운송인 등에 대한 배상청구- 대법원 2007.4.27. 선고, 2007다4943 판결과 관련하여 -", 인권과 정의, (377), pp.216~231 (2008), 대한변호사협회
- 이균성, "운송주선인의 해상운송인으로서의 지위취득. in: 민사판례연구(Ⅺ)" (1989), 박영사
- 이균성, "해상법의 개정과 해상운송인의 손해배상책임", 한국해법회지, 14(1) (1992), 한국해법회
- 이은섭, "정기용선계약하에서 적하손해에 대한 선박소유자와 정기용선자의 책임관계", 무역학회지, 26(4) (2001), 한국무역학회
- 임동철, "재운송계약과 선박소유자의 책임－운송책임의 주체와 관련하여－", 한국해법회지, 15(1) (1993), 한국해법학회
- 정병윤, "재용선계약에서 주운송인인 선박임차인의 책임(大法院 2004.10,27, 선고2004다7040판결) (原審 : 부산고법 2003.12.11. 선고 2003나172판결)", 상사판례연구, 18(4), pp.209~235 (2005), 한국상사판례학회
- 정영석, "해상운송인의 면책사유에 관한 해석론적 연구", 박사, pp.1995
- 정재영,"해상법상 운송인의 손해배상책임에 관한 연구",한국해양대 박사학위논문, "해상법상 운송인의 손해배상책임에 관한 연구", 박사, pp.2006
- 조희대, "상법 제811조의 해석", 민사재판의 제문제, 10 (2000), 한국사법행정학회
- 채이식, "船舶所有者 및 海上運送人(艤裝者)의 槪念", 한국해법학회지, 24(1), pp.45~67 (2002), 한국해법학회
- 천종호, "선박임차인의 법적 지위", 판례연구, 17 (2006), 부산판례연구회
- 최세련, "운송주선인의 법적 지위 및 히말라야 약관의 적용 범위 - 대법원 2007. 4. 27. 선고 2007다4943 판결의 평석 -", 한국해법학회지, 30(1), pp.115~138 (2008), 한국해법학회
- 최종현, "개정 해상법 하에서의 해상운송인의 지위 - 해상운송인의 손해배상책임제도를 중심으로 -", 한국해법학회지, 30(1), pp.49~83 (2008), 한국해법학회
- 최종현, "상법 제811조(단기제소기간)의 적용범위. in: 상사판례연구(Ⅳ)" (1997), 박영사
- Hill, Christoper, "Maritime Law" (2003), LLP
- Jane Andrewartha, "English Maritime Law Update: 2003", Journal of Maritime Law and Commerce (2004)
- Julian Cooke, "Voyage Charters, 2nd ed" (2001), Lloyd’s of London Press Ltd.
- Schoenbaum, Thomas J., "Admiralty and Maritime Law, 2nd ed" (1994), West Pub. Co.
- Tetley, William, "Marine Cargo Claims, 3rd ed" (1988), International Shipping Publication
- Wilford, Michael, "Time Charters, 5th ed" (2003), Lloyd’s of London Press
- Wilson, J. F., "Carriage of Goods by Sea, 6th ed", pp.2008, Pearson