2021년 중요 해상판례소개

Abstract

In 2021, nine important maritime cases rendered in Korea were selected and reviewed, and the summary is as follows: (1) In Supreme Court Decision 2017Do9982 rendered on May 7, 2021, the court held that the act of collecting and selling wrecks on the territorial sea using a foreign flagged vessel was in violation of the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone Act. (2) In Busan High Court Decision 2020No151 rendered on May 26, 2021, the court interpreted the seaworthiness defect stipulated in Article 74(1) of the Ship Safety Act to mean a case where a ship lacks the capability to safely perform a particular voyage and, if left unattended, is likely to cause an accident, and thus requires certain repair of supplementation. (3) In Seoul Central District Court Decision 2020Gahap540450 rendered on May 28, 2021, the court deemed Article 137 of the Commercial Act, which adopted the principle of fixed amount compensation, as a discretionary provision, and determined that the principle of fixed amount compensation was not applicable, as there was an agreement between the parties to the carriage contract to exclude the application of such provision. (4) In Supreme Court Decision 2017Da286874 rendered on June 10, 2021, the court held that the State’s liability for damages is not recognized as there is no proximate causal relation between the violation of the duty to rescue by a public official of the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries and the death of the victim. (5) In Busan High Court Decision 2020Na58147 rendered on June 17, 2021, the court held that the bank which provided the ship financing is merely a mortgagee of the ship and thus, is not liable to pay port facility usage fees. (6) In Supreme Court Decision 2020Do3996 rendered on September 30, 2021, the court held that an employer bears the duty to take safety and health measures under the Occupational Safety and Health Act in order to prevent cranes from colliding with each other when multiple cranes are put into work in a shipyard. (7) In Seoul High Court Decision 2021Nu33915 rendered on November 17, 2021 held that the notification that included transshipment cargo as the object of safe freight was invalid since it violated the principle of statutory reservation. (8) In Supreme Court Decision 2018Da204114 rendered on December 16, 2021, the court held that Article 13(3) of the former Enforcement Decree of Port Authority Act, which recognizes expenses for paying port facility usage fees on behalf of cargo interest, does not grant discretion to the Port Authority as to whether to pay such expenses, and is not contrary to the principle of statutory reservation, and thus, cannot be deemed as an invalid provision. (9) On April. 11, 2022, the Korea Fair Trade Commission found that the collusion of freight rates constituted an unlawful collusive act in violation of the Fair Trade Act on the ground that the southeast Asian liner companies failed to comply with the requirements for reporting and consultation required under Marine Transport Act.