2001年度 海商法 관련 重要判例 評釋

Abstract

This article deals with the major Korean Maritime case of 2001, which are composed of one case regarding the liability of the time charterer, three cases regarding the carrier’s liability as the issuer of bills of lading, one time bar case and one case regarding insurer’s exemption of liability. On February 9, 2001 Korean Supreme court rendered that if the carrier issue a bill of lading with unknown clause(word) the shipper might have a burden of proof on the condition of cargo at loading port in case of FCL cargo. If LCL cargo is the case, the carrier might have a burden of proof against the written contents on bill of lading. On April 10, 2001 Korean Supreme court simply followed several previous decisions that the carrier must take responsibility for damages of the bona fide holder of bill of lading in case of the delivery of cargo without the production of original bill of lading. On April 27, 2001 Korean Supreme court confirmed again that the master’s wilful misconduct does not affect the right of package limitation of the carrier. On May 15, 2001 Korean Supreme court rendered that unseawortiness is not enough for hull insurer to exempt the liability in case of time policy, which followed the English Marine Insurance Act Article 39(5). On July 10, 2001 Korean Supreme court rendered that the time charter might be vicariously responsible for the negligence of the crew’s commercial error on the ground that the time charterer has control over the crew on the commercial aspect of the time chartered vessel. On October 30, 2001 Korean Supreme court expounded on Article 811 of the Korean Commercial Code. It rendered that the above article is not applicable to the recourse claim. Therefore, when the contractual carrier who paid claims to the cargo interests try to invoke a recourse claim to the actual carrier, one year time bar is not applied.