송하인의 운송에 적합한 운송물 인도의무 - 로테르담 규칙을 바탕으로 -
Study on the Shipper’s Obligation to Deliver the Goods Ready for Carriage under the Rotterdam Rules
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The shipper and the carrier may always specify what ready for carriagemeans. If the parties do not specify how the goods are to be delivered,there is a presumption that the goods shall withstand the intended carriage,including their loading, handling, stowing, lashing and securing, andunloading without being damaged and without causing damage to the shipor other cargo or injury to the crew. Neither the Hague/Hague-Visby Rulesnor Hamburg Rules explicitly deal with this obligation. On the other hand, it is general that the risk transfer from shipper(seller)to consignee(buyer) on shipment in both FOB and CIF contract under theCISG. In relationship with the Rotterdam Rules, finally the cargoclamant(buyer) may allege that the risk still remains with the shipper wherehe could find the shipper’s breach of obligation to delver the goods readyfor carriage. For instance, the shipper would be liable for inevitabledeterioration arising from insufficiently packing of the goods and failing tostowing the goods properly considering their nature and the intendedvoyage. Based on the text of article 27.1 under the Rotterdam Rules, theconclusion does seem to be that the shipper's duty to deliver the modifiedin the contract of carriage. This interpretation is supported by the fact that subparagraph 3, which concerns the stowage of goods inside a container ortrailer. and thus also concerns the safety aspect, does not contain an ‘unlessotherwise agreed’ qualification. This would mean that agreements betweenthe shipper and the carrier are only valid if they concern aspects of thereadiness for carriage, other than the safe transportability of the goods. Also, the chapeau of the article was changed to make it read ‘basis ofshipper's liabilities to the carrier’, to make it clear this article only dealswith the (contractual) liabilities between shipper and carrier, not withpotential liabilities of the shipper vis-à-vis third parties, this being outsidethe scope of the Rotterdam Rules. it is not intended to create a right ofaction for third parties against the shipper. In order to hold the shipper liable, the carrier has to prove that hesuffered loss or damage, that the shipper breached one or more of hisobligation under the Rotterdam Rules, and that there is a link of causationbetween these two elements. If the carrier succeeds in proving loss ordamage, breach of obligation and causation, the burden then shifts to theshipper to prove that cause or one of the causes of the loss is notattributable to its fault or to the fault of any person for whom the shipperis liable under article 34.
Abstract
The shipper and the carrier may always specify what ready for carriagemeans. If the parties do not specify how the goods are to be delivered,there is a presumption that the goods shall withstand the intended carriage,including their loading, handling, stowing, lashing and securing, andunloading without being damaged and without causing damage to the shipor other cargo or injury to the crew. Neither the Hague/Hague-Visby Rulesnor Hamburg Rules explicitly deal with this obligation. On the other hand, it is general that the risk transfer from shipper(seller)to consignee(buyer) on shipment in both FOB and CIF contract under theCISG. In relationship with the Rotterdam Rules, finally the cargoclamant(buyer) may allege that the risk still remains with the shipper wherehe could find the shipper’s breach of obligation to delver the goods readyfor carriage. For instance, the shipper would be liable for inevitabledeterioration arising from insufficiently packing of the goods and failing tostowing the goods properly considering their nature and the intendedvoyage. Based on the text of article 27.1 under the Rotterdam Rules, theconclusion does seem to be that the shipper's duty to deliver the modifiedin the contract of carriage. This interpretation is supported by the fact that subparagraph 3, which concerns the stowage of goods inside a container ortrailer. and thus also concerns the safety aspect, does not contain an ‘unlessotherwise agreed’ qualification. This would mean that agreements betweenthe shipper and the carrier are only valid if they concern aspects of thereadiness for carriage, other than the safe transportability of the goods. Also, the chapeau of the article was changed to make it read ‘basis ofshipper's liabilities to the carrier’, to make it clear this article only dealswith the (contractual) liabilities between shipper and carrier, not withpotential liabilities of the shipper vis-à-vis third parties, this being outsidethe scope of the Rotterdam Rules. it is not intended to create a right ofaction for third parties against the shipper. In order to hold the shipper liable, the carrier has to prove that hesuffered loss or damage, that the shipper breached one or more of hisobligation under the Rotterdam Rules, and that there is a link of causationbetween these two elements. If the carrier succeeds in proving loss ordamage, breach of obligation and causation, the burden then shifts to theshipper to prove that cause or one of the causes of the loss is notattributable to its fault or to the fault of any person for whom the shipperis liable under article 34.
참고문헌 (45)
- 김인현, "해상법" (2011), 법문사
- 김정호, (2005), 법문사
- 박용섭, "해상법론" (1994), 형설출판사
- , 2001, ~, pp., 한국사법행정학회
- 정동윤, "상법(하)" (2000), 법문사
- 정찬형, "상법강의(하)(제15판)" (2013), 박영사
- 채이식, "상법 Ⅳ-보험법·해상법-" (2001), 박영사
- 한국선주협회, "로테르담규칙 해설", ~ (2009)
- 권기훈, "해상운송물 손해에 관한 감항능력 입증책임", 법과정책연구, 7(2), pp.461~484 (2007), 한국법정책학회
- 김인현, "로테르담 규칙하의 송하인의 의무", 한국해법학회지, 35(1), pp.179~208 (2013), 한국해법학회
- 김인현, "유엔 운시트랄(UNCITRAL)의 새로운 운송조약안의 주요내용", 한국해법학회지, 28(2), pp.7~35 (2006), 한국해법학회
- 김인현, "UN UNCITRAL 運送法會議에서 運送人의 責任制度", 한국해법학회지, 27(2), pp.357~404 (2005), 한국해법학회
- 김인현, "제16차 운시트랄 운송법회의 보고서", 한국해법학회지, 28(1) (2006), 한국해법학회
- 박세민, "해상보험법상 담보(warranty)의 개념과 영국 협회적하보험약관 제5조 및 상법 제706조 제1호(해상보험자 면책사유)에 관한 고찰", 한국해법학회지, 27(2), pp.107~148 (2005), 한국해법학회
- 송옥렬, "UNCITRAL 해상운송협약상 送荷人의 責任", 국제거래법연구, 16(2), pp.291~312 (2007), 국제거래법학회
- 이상주, "상법 제788조 제2항 본문 후단의 ‘화재’의 발화원인 내지 발화장소의범위와 같은 조 제2항 단서의 ‘운송인’의 범위", 대법원판례해설, (42) (2002)
- 이창희, "상법 제788조 1항의 해석에 관한 연구", 한국해법학회지, 27(2), pp.39~74 (2005), 한국해법학회
- 전영우, "해상운송계약법상 감항능력의 내용에 관한 일고찰③", 월간 해양한국, (274) (1996), 한국해사문제연구소
- 정성훈, "해상운송물품의 고유하자와 관련된 손해와 그 책임에 관한 연구", 박사, 무역학, pp.2000
- 정영석, "헤이그 비스비규칙상의 운송인 면책사유 ④", 월간 해양한국, (272) (1996)
- 정영석, "해상운송인의 상사과실", 한국해법학회지, 16(1) (1994)
- 국제 화물운송 질서 크게 바뀐다 -유엔, 올 11월 총회에서 새로운 협약채택, "최재선", 한국해양수산개발원, ~, pp.해양수산현안분석2008-04 (2008)
- 최종현, "해상고유의 위험으로 인한 운송인의 면책 (대상판례:서울지방법원 2002가합13497 판결)", 한국해법학회지, 26(2), pp.229~244 (2004), 한국해법학회
- 최준선, "UNCITRAL 국제운송법 제13차 회의 참가보고서", 한국해법학회지, 26(2) (2004)
- 今村有, "海上保險契約法論" (1979), 損害保險事業硏究所
- Bianca, C. M, "Commenntary on the International Sales Law : The 1980 Vienna Sales Convention" (1987), Giuffre
- Colinvaux, Raul, "Carver’s Carriage by Sea - Vol. Ⅰ" (1971), Stevens & Sons
- Dook J., "Voyage Charters" (1993), Lloyd's of London Press
- Guest, A.G., "Benjamin’s Sale of Goods" (1992), Sweet & Maxwell
- Honnold, John O, "Uniform Law for International Sales under the 1980 United Nations Convention" (2009), Kluwer Law International
- Ivamy, E R Hardy, "Marine Insurance" (1985), Butterworths
- Lambeth, R. J, "Templeman on Marine Insurance" (1986), Pitman
- Maraist Frank L, "Cases and Materials on Maritime Law" (2003), West Group
- Mocatta, A. A., "Scrutton on charterparties and bills of lading" (1984), Sweet & Maxwell
- Schoenbaum, Thomas J, "Admiralty and Maritime Law" (2001), West Group
- Staudinger, "Magnus, Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch mit Einführungsgesetz und Nebengesetzen Wiener UN-Kaufrecht (CISG)" (2005), Sellier - de Gruyter
- Sturley, Michael F, "The Rotterdam Rules -The UN Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea" (2010), Sweet & Maxwell
- Tetley, William, "Marine Cargo Claims" (1988), Blais
- Thomas, D Rhidian, "The Carriage of Goods by Sea under the Rotterdam Rules" (2010), Lloyd’s List
- Johan Schelin, "Alexander", pp.Kluwer Law International, Stefano Zunarelli, The Rotterdam Rules 2008 -Commentary to the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea
- Wilson, John F, "Carriage of Goods by Sea", pp.2008, Pearson
- Baughen, Simon, "Obligations Owed by the Shipper to the Carrier, In A New Convention for the Carriage of Goods by Sea : The Rotterdam Rules" (2009), Lawtext Publishing
- Olebakken, Ingeborg Holtskog, "Background paper on shipper's obligations and liabilities" (2008), CMI Yearbook
- Sturley, M. F., "Modernizing and Reforming U.S. Maritime Law: The Rotterdam Rules in the United States", Texas International Law Journal (2009)
- Tomotaka Fujita, "Shipper’s Obligations and Liabilities under the Rotterdam Rules", Soft Law, 2010(3) (2010)