로테르담 규칙상 대량정기화물운송계약(volume contract)에 관한 법적 고찰
Legal Research on the Volume Contract under the Rotterdam Rules
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
There are also recognised in the Rotterdam Rules contracts to which the Rules apply but where the parties also enjoy a degree of freedom of contract. In other words, these are categories of contract where the parties are free to vary and even derogate from the mandatory nature of the Rules. Such categories are not a novel phenomenon in the tradition of international maritime transport conventions but a few and controversial addition has been introduced by the Rules, characterised as ‘volume contract’. Volume contract appears to be most familiar to those with experience of shipping practice in the US, where the category has received legislative recognition, and in the Scandinavian region. Its roots appear to be found in the acceptance of the validity of Ocean Liner Service Agreement (OLSA) in the reform of the ocean liner industry made by the US Shipping Act 1984as amended by the Ocean Shipping Reform Act 1998, as a consequence of which OLSA developed quickly to occupy a significant position in many areas of US international trade, both outward and inward. These reforms allowed for competitively negotiated liner service contracts, with parties,except for NVOCCs, permitted to enter into specialized and customized OLSA agreements. The category is addressed in article 80 of the Rules, which in its essence provides that in respect to a contract which is characterised as a volume contract, the parties may, subject to the conditions set out in the articles 14(a) and (b), 29, 32 and 61. The burden of proving that any or all of these conditions have been satisfied is borne by the party claiming the benefit of the licence to derogate, which may be either the carrier or shipper, but more likely it will be the carrier. In other words, subject to the designated conditions and limitations,freedom of contract prevails as between carriers and shippers, who may contract on terms that provide for greater or lesser rights, obligations and liabilities than those imposed by the Rules. Only when a carrier apply, and such derogation, again subject to protective conditions, may be binding on third parties. In the absence of any such special agreement, the provisions of the Rules continue to apply to volume contract. The purpose of this article aims to analyse the implications of volume contract clause under the Rotterdam Rules.
Abstract
There are also recognised in the Rotterdam Rules contracts to which the Rules apply but where the parties also enjoy a degree of freedom of contract. In other words, these are categories of contract where the parties are free to vary and even derogate from the mandatory nature of the Rules. Such categories are not a novel phenomenon in the tradition of international maritime transport conventions but a few and controversial addition has been introduced by the Rules, characterised as ‘volume contract’. Volume contract appears to be most familiar to those with experience of shipping practice in the US, where the category has received legislative recognition, and in the Scandinavian region. Its roots appear to be found in the acceptance of the validity of Ocean Liner Service Agreement (OLSA) in the reform of the ocean liner industry made by the US Shipping Act 1984as amended by the Ocean Shipping Reform Act 1998, as a consequence of which OLSA developed quickly to occupy a significant position in many areas of US international trade, both outward and inward. These reforms allowed for competitively negotiated liner service contracts, with parties,except for NVOCCs, permitted to enter into specialized and customized OLSA agreements. The category is addressed in article 80 of the Rules, which in its essence provides that in respect to a contract which is characterised as a volume contract, the parties may, subject to the conditions set out in the articles 14(a) and (b), 29, 32 and 61. The burden of proving that any or all of these conditions have been satisfied is borne by the party claiming the benefit of the licence to derogate, which may be either the carrier or shipper, but more likely it will be the carrier. In other words, subject to the designated conditions and limitations,freedom of contract prevails as between carriers and shippers, who may contract on terms that provide for greater or lesser rights, obligations and liabilities than those imposed by the Rules. Only when a carrier apply, and such derogation, again subject to protective conditions, may be binding on third parties. In the absence of any such special agreement, the provisions of the Rules continue to apply to volume contract. The purpose of this article aims to analyse the implications of volume contract clause under the Rotterdam Rules.
참고문헌 (24)
- 이균성, "신해상법대계" (2010), 한국해양수산개발원
- 대량운송계약(volume contract)에 대한 UNCITRAL 운송법 실무작업반 Ⅲ에서의 논의와 그 의미, In 국제규범의 현황과 전망 -2007년 국제규범연구반 연구보고, "김동진", 법원행정처, ~ (2008)
- 김만석, "미국 1998년 외항해운개혁법(OSRA)이 정기선해운에 미치는 영향에 관한 실증연구", 박사, pp.2007
- 이슈진단 : 1998년 미국 외항해운개혁법(OSRA)이 정기선 해운에 미친 영향, "김만석", 해양한국, ~ (2001)
- 김인현, "국제해상물건운송계약에 관한 2008년 UNCITRAL 조약(로테르담규칙)의 適用範圍와 契約自由의 原則", 법학연구, 49(2), pp.35~70 (2009), 법학연구소
- 김인현, "제17차 유엔 운시트랄 운송법회의에 대한 보고", 한국해법학회지, 28(2) (2006)
- 김인현, "제41차 운시트랄 총회 운송법회의 참가보고서", 한국해법학회지, 30(2) (2008)
- 김인현, "제19차 운시트랄 운송법회의 보고서", 한국해법학회지, 29(2) (2007)
- 유병욱, "로테르담규칙에서 운송인의 책임에 관한 연구 -헤이그규칙, 헤이그비스비규칙, 함부르크규칙의 비교를 중심으로", 국제상학, 24(4), pp.95~123 (2009), 한국국제상학회
- 운송법 조약안 작성을 위한 UNCITRAL 실무작업반 회의의 경과와 내용, In 국제규범의 현황과 전망, "이태종", 법원행정처, ~ (2006)
- 최준선, "UNCITRAL 국제(해상)운송법초안의 재판관할조항에 대한 고찰", 한국해법학회지, 28(1), pp.403~431 (2006), 한국해법학회
- 한낙현, "로테르담 규칙상 수량계약조항의 시사점에 관한 연구", 무역상무연구, 49, pp.325~358 (2011), 한국무역상무학회
- 古田伸一, "新國連國際物品運送條約基本的なポイント", 海運, (984) (2009)
- 日本海運集會所, "ロッテルダム·ルール", 海運, (995) (2010)
- Baatz, Yvonne, "The Rotterdam Rules: A Practical Annotation" (2009), Informa
- 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, 4th ed., vol. 1" (2008)
- Thomas, D Rhidian, "The Carriage of Goods by Sea under the Rotterdam Rules" (2010), Lloyd’s List
- "The Impact of the Ocean Shipping Reform Act 1998"[URL]
- Von Ziegler, Alexander, "The Rotterdam Rules 2008 -Commentary to the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea" (2010), Kluwer Law International
- Anthony Diamond QC, "The Next Sea Carriage Convention", Lloyd’s Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly, 2 (2008)
- Honka, Honda, "The Legislative Future of Carriage of Goods by Sea: Could It Not Be the UNCITRAL Draft", Scandinavian Studies in Law, 46 (2004)
- Thomas, D. Rhidian, "An Appraisal of the Liability Regime Established under the New UN Convention", JIML, 14, pp.496~ (2008)
- Sturley, M. F., "Modernizing and Reforming U.S. Maritime Law: The Rotterdam Rules in the United States", Texas International Law Journal, (봄) (2009)
