本文選題：運輸合同 + 契約自由��； 參考：《中國法學(xué)》2016年06期

【摘要】：當(dāng)法律需要實現(xiàn)的目標是對公共利益的維護時,強制性規(guī)則是必要的,但當(dāng)法律試圖調(diào)整承托雙方之間的利益公平時,就產(chǎn)生了強制性是否需要和進行干預(yù)程度的問題。強制性規(guī)則雖然對國際海上班輪貨物運輸合同責(zé)任的公平性分配、保護貨方利益發(fā)揮了重要的作用,但其整體效果仍有待進一步研究。強制性規(guī)則的缺陷集中體現(xiàn)在責(zé)任的固定上,這會削弱效率價值的發(fā)揮,而是否取消強制性干預(yù)主要是由船貨雙方談判勢力的平等性所決定的。目前的航運事實未能證明承運人繼續(xù)和長期擁有這種優(yōu)勢的談判地位,承托雙方談判勢力趨向平等,從而為契約自由提供了基礎(chǔ)�；趪H班輪運輸?shù)牟糠珠L期合作性合同中承托雙方談判勢力趨向平等,《鹿特丹規(guī)則》中制定了批量合同,回歸契約自由原則,以構(gòu)建一個整體上有實效的,但應(yīng)受到一種最低限度的航運安全、公共利益與公序良俗限制的航運秩序。這代表了當(dāng)今國際海上班輪貨物運輸合同中強制性的干預(yù)程度、強制性規(guī)則與任意性規(guī)則平衡發(fā)展的趨勢。
[Abstract]:When the goal of the law is to safeguard the public interest, mandatory rules are necessary, but when the law tries to adjust the equity of the interests between the two parties, the question of whether or not the compulsory need and the degree of intervention arises.Although the mandatory rules play an important role in the fair distribution of the liability and the protection of the interests of the cargo parties, the overall effect of the rules remains to be further studied.The limitation of mandatory rules is mainly reflected in the fixed liability, which will weaken the exertion of efficiency value, and whether or not to cancel the mandatory intervention is mainly determined by the equality of the negotiating power between the ship and the cargo parties.The current shipping facts fail to prove that the carrier continues to have this advantage for a long time, and that the negotiation forces of both parties tend to be equal, thus providing the basis for the freedom of contract.Based on the fact that in part of the long-term cooperative contracts for international liner shipping, the negotiating forces of both parties tend to be equal, the "Rotterdam rules" have formulated bulk contracts and returned to the principle of freedom of contract, in order to build an overall and effective one.However, the shipping order should be restricted by a minimum of shipping safety, public interest and public order.This represents the trend of the balance between compulsory and arbitrary rules in the international contract for the carriage of goods by sea.
【作者單位】： 南開大學(xué)法學(xué)院;
【分類號】：D996.19

【相似文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前5條

1 倪莞;;國際貨物運輸合同的法律特征[J];商;2014年05期

2 常麗莎;;淺析《全程或者部分海上國際貨物運輸合同公約》的調(diào)整范圍[J];法制與社會;2009年10期

3 張湘蘭;向力;;《全程或者部分海上國際貨物運輸合同公約》對條約沖突的應(yīng)對[J];武漢理工大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2009年02期

4 劉壽杰;;訴前扣押船載貨物案[J];中國海商法年刊;1990年00期

5 ;[J];;年期

相關(guān)會議論文 前2條

1 鐘尉華;;國際貨物運輸合同芻議[A];第三屆貴州法學(xué)論壇文集[C];2001年

2 鐘尉華;;國際貨物運輸合同芻議[A];貴州法學(xué)論壇第三屆文集[C];2001年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 劉虹;關(guān)于水路貨物運輸合同若干問題之探討[D];上海海運學(xué)院;2001年

，

本文編號：1750882