發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-08-16 07:43

【摘要】：海上拖航作為海上作業(yè)方式之一,其應(yīng)用日益廣泛,拖船拖帶載貨駁船的海上貨物運(yùn)輸不斷增多,無(wú)動(dòng)力的海上油氣開(kāi)采設(shè)備離不開(kāi)拖航作業(yè),甚至在工程建設(shè)領(lǐng)域如跨海大橋的建造中,海上拖航也不可或缺。然而,不論從國(guó)際立法還是國(guó)內(nèi)法規(guī)制來(lái)看,對(duì)海上拖航的規(guī)定都涉及甚少且較為零散,尤其是海上拖航損害賠償責(zé)任這一核心問(wèn)題。該責(zé)任之所以尤為重要,在于其不僅是平衡拖帶雙方利益的有效手段,更是支撐海上拖航產(chǎn)業(yè)持續(xù)壯大、維護(hù)拖帶作業(yè)正常秩序的有力保證。目前,就海上拖航這一作業(yè)形式?jīng)]有統(tǒng)一的國(guó)際公約可以適用,有關(guān)規(guī)則散見(jiàn)于各國(guó)國(guó)內(nèi)的海事立法中。我國(guó)《海商法》第七部分以專(zhuān)章的形式對(duì)海上拖航進(jìn)行規(guī)制,但該部分僅有五條條文涉及其損害賠償責(zé)任,條文內(nèi)容比較簡(jiǎn)略。并且,僅有的規(guī)范中大部分是任意性規(guī)范,賦予當(dāng)事人很大程度的締約自由。在實(shí)踐中,拖航企業(yè)以其制定的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)合同對(duì)拖帶雙方的責(zé)任進(jìn)行劃分,不同拖航合同的責(zé)任劃分有所區(qū)別,但都存在相當(dāng)數(shù)量對(duì)承拖方有所傾斜的條款。司法實(shí)踐中,對(duì)這些合同條款的認(rèn)定缺乏判斷所需的有關(guān)法律標(biāo)準(zhǔn)且存在較多分歧。同時(shí),拖航的船隊(duì)作業(yè)方式以及動(dòng)力船舶拖帶無(wú)動(dòng)力船舶的作業(yè)特點(diǎn),使得其在適用一般海事規(guī)則時(shí)存在困境,如就對(duì)第三人的連帶責(zé)任限制問(wèn)題而言,存在限額計(jì)算上的爭(zhēng)議。本文立足于《海商法》第七部分海上拖航有關(guān)內(nèi)容,在全面理解其損害賠償責(zé)任有關(guān)理論的基礎(chǔ)上,結(jié)合國(guó)內(nèi)外的典型案例,深入分析我國(guó)的損害賠償責(zé)任在法律規(guī)制和具體適用中存在的問(wèn)題,并提出對(duì)應(yīng)的解決思路或解決方案。除引言和結(jié)語(yǔ)外,本文分為五個(gè)部分:第一部分“海上拖航損害賠償責(zé)任概述”。首先厘清海上拖航損害賠償責(zé)任的有關(guān)概念,對(duì)文章的寫(xiě)作范圍進(jìn)行界定,然后歸納該責(zé)任的特殊性,為下文的寫(xiě)作提供指導(dǎo),總之這部分為下文問(wèn)題的展開(kāi)做鋪墊。第二部分“我國(guó)海上拖航損害賠償責(zé)任的劃分問(wèn)題”。以分析我國(guó)《海商法》的現(xiàn)行規(guī)定為基礎(chǔ),將責(zé)任劃分問(wèn)題分為拖帶雙方的責(zé)任劃分和涉及第三方的責(zé)任劃分兩類(lèi)并分別進(jìn)行分析,其中舉證責(zé)任分配依據(jù)和責(zé)任劃分標(biāo)準(zhǔn)問(wèn)題與海上拖航作業(yè)緊密結(jié)合,是本部分的核心內(nèi)容。第三部分“我國(guó)海上拖航合同免責(zé)條款的效力問(wèn)題”。首先明確《海商法》第162條是否賦予當(dāng)事人在合同中約定免責(zé)條款的權(quán)利,進(jìn)而分析該規(guī)則是否能作為免責(zé)條款效力的判斷依據(jù),其次就當(dāng)前合同中典型的免責(zé)條款進(jìn)行有針對(duì)性的分析,再次就適拖義務(wù)的履行是否影響協(xié)議免責(zé)事由的援引提出疑問(wèn),最后就免責(zé)約定是否構(gòu)成格式條款而適用《合同法》有關(guān)規(guī)定進(jìn)行分析。第四部分“我國(guó)海上拖航損害賠償責(zé)任限制的問(wèn)題”。對(duì)拖航連帶責(zé)任適用責(zé)任限制制度的困境進(jìn)行梳理,包括連帶責(zé)任下責(zé)任限額計(jì)算方案的分歧和該責(zé)任下責(zé)任限制基金的設(shè)立問(wèn)題與分配問(wèn)題。第五部分“完善我國(guó)海上拖航損害賠償責(zé)任的若干建議”。在對(duì)第二、第三、第四部分的各個(gè)問(wèn)題進(jìn)一步分析的基礎(chǔ)上,提出完善建議如以舉證責(zé)任的倒置合理分配拖帶雙方責(zé)任,以指揮權(quán)原則的引入指導(dǎo)責(zé)任劃分,界定免責(zé)條款效力的判斷依據(jù),明確連帶責(zé)任下責(zé)任限額的計(jì)算等,以期為有關(guān)司法實(shí)踐問(wèn)題的解決尋求路徑。
[Abstract]:As one of the sea operations, towing is widely used. The cargo transportation of tugboat towing barge is increasing. Unpowered offshore oil and gas exploitation equipment can not be separated from towing operation. Even in the construction of engineering fields such as cross-sea bridge, towing is indispensable. In terms of domestic laws and regulations, the provisions on towing at sea are very few and scattered, especially the core issue of liability for damages caused by towing at sea. At present, there is no uniform International Convention on towing at sea, and the relevant rules are scattered in the domestic maritime legislation of various countries. The seventh part of China's Maritime Code regulates towing at sea in the form of a special chapter. However, there are only five articles in this part which deal with the liability for damages. In practice, the towing enterprise divides the responsibilities of towing parties according to the standard contracts it formulates, and the responsibilities of different towing contracts are different, but there are a considerable number of provisions that are inclined to the towing party. In the practice of law, the determination of these contract terms lacks the relevant legal standards and there are many differences. At the same time, the operation mode of towing fleet and the operation characteristics of powered ships towing unpowered ships make it difficult to apply general maritime rules, such as the limitation of joint and several liability for third parties. There are disputes on the calculation of the limit. Based on the relevant contents of the seventh part of the Maritime Code, and on the basis of comprehensively understanding the relevant theories of the liability for damages, combined with typical cases at home and abroad, this paper makes a thorough analysis of the problems existing in the legal regulation and specific application of the liability for damages in China, and puts forward corresponding solutions. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, this paper is divided into five parts: the first part of the "overview of the liability for damages caused by towing at sea". First of all, clarify the concept of liability for damages caused by towing at sea, define the scope of the article, and then summarize the particularity of the liability, to provide guidance for the writing of the following part, in short The second part is "the division of liability for damages caused by towing at sea in China". Based on the analysis of the current provisions of China's Maritime Law, the division of liability is divided into two categories: the division of liability between towing parties and the division of liability involving third parties, and the distribution of the burden of proof is analyzed separately. The third part is about the validity of the exemption clause in China's maritime towage contract. First, it is clear whether Article 162 of the Maritime Code gives the parties the right to stipulate the exemption clause in the contract, and then it is analyzed whether the rule can be regarded as exemption. The judgment basis of the validity of the clause is followed by a pertinent analysis of the typical exemption clause in the current contract. The question is raised again as to whether the performance of the obligation of delay affects the invocation of the exemption cause of the agreement. Finally, the analysis is made on whether the exemption Agreement constitutes a standard clause and applies the relevant provisions of the Contract Law. Chapter Five is about how to perfect the liability for damages caused by Towage at sea in China. On the basis of the further analysis of the problems in the second, third and fourth parts, this paper puts forward some suggestions, such as reasonably allocating the burden of proof to both parties, dividing the guiding responsibility by introducing the principle of command power, defining the judgment basis of the validity of exemption clauses, and defining the calculation of the limit of liability under joint and several liability. To seek a solution to the problem of judicial practice.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2016
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D922.294

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 馬賢興,丁念紅;停車(chē)場(chǎng)車(chē)輛丟失損害賠償責(zé)任問(wèn)題探討[J];人民司法;2001年07期

2 方軍;關(guān)于機(jī)動(dòng)車(chē)損害賠償責(zé)任的思考[J];貴陽(yáng)市委黨校學(xué)報(bào);2001年03期

3 范仕源;被判刑就可不承擔(dān)損害賠償責(zé)任嗎?[J];安全與健康;2003年20期

4 張立先,李軍紅;網(wǎng)上銀行業(yè)務(wù)糾紛中的損害賠償責(zé)任[J];濟(jì)南金融;2004年03期

5 戚摯;論機(jī)動(dòng)車(chē)肇事?lián)p害賠償責(zé)任主體的確定[J];法律適用;2004年08期

6 于敏;;機(jī)動(dòng)車(chē)損害賠償責(zé)任對(duì)交通行為的規(guī)范作用[J];法學(xué)雜志;2006年02期

7 李桂星;;人身觸電損害賠償責(zé)任的認(rèn)定[J];農(nóng)村電工;2006年11期

8 牛凌峰;周煥翔;;幼兒園該不該承擔(dān)完全損害賠償責(zé)任[J];農(nóng)村百事通;2009年06期

9 高翔龍;樸愛(ài)圣;;韓國(guó)的機(jī)動(dòng)車(chē)事故發(fā)生現(xiàn)狀和損害賠償責(zé)任——以機(jī)動(dòng)車(chē)損害賠償保障法第三條為中心[J];金陵法律評(píng)論;2009年02期

10 楊學(xué)友;;村干部因公受傷,損害賠償責(zé)任誰(shuí)擔(dān)[J];村委主任;2012年01期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前4條

1 匡小明;;論我國(guó)生態(tài)損害賠償責(zé)任的司法量化[A];生態(tài)安全與環(huán)境風(fēng)險(xiǎn)防范法治建設(shè)——2011年全國(guó)環(huán)境資源法學(xué)研討會(huì)（年會(huì)）論文集（第一冊(cè)）[C];2011年

2 張林鴻;王蜀黔;;高度危險(xiǎn)作業(yè)的損害賠償責(zé)任與責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)[A];第二屆貴州法學(xué)論壇文集[C];2001年

3 李秀雅;梁文婷;朱慧;李希昆;;論農(nóng)村水環(huán)境污染的損害賠償責(zé)任[A];水污染防治立法和循環(huán)經(jīng)濟(jì)立法研究——2005年全國(guó)環(huán)境資源法學(xué)研討會(huì)論文集（第一冊(cè)）[C];2005年

4 簡(jiǎn)資修;;醫(yī)師的損害賠償責(zé)任與說(shuō)明義務(wù)——合約理論與臺(tái)灣經(jīng)驗(yàn)[A];2008年度（第六屆）中國(guó)法經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)論壇論文集（上）[C];2008年

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前10條

1 中國(guó)社科院法學(xué)所副研究員、法學(xué)博士 于 敏;機(jī)動(dòng)車(chē)損害賠償責(zé)任與法律公平的實(shí)現(xiàn)[N];人民法院報(bào);2004年

2 陳新華;機(jī)動(dòng)車(chē)損害賠償責(zé)任主體的界定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)[N];江蘇經(jīng)濟(jì)報(bào);2008年

3 中國(guó)核保險(xiǎn)共同體執(zhí)行機(jī)構(gòu) 左惠強(qiáng)　顧頌;我國(guó)亟需建立健全核損害賠償責(zé)任法律制度(上)[N];中國(guó)保險(xiǎn)報(bào);2011年

4 ;被盜機(jī)動(dòng)車(chē)肇事后由誰(shuí)承擔(dān)損害賠償責(zé)任？[N];西部時(shí)報(bào);2007年

5 本報(bào)法律組;被盜車(chē)輛肇事，車(chē)主應(yīng)承擔(dān)損害賠償責(zé)任嗎[N];檢察日?qǐng)?bào);2002年

6 郭麗軍;核損害賠償責(zé)任立法及保障淺析[N];中國(guó)保險(xiǎn)報(bào);2011年

7 本報(bào)記者 張媛;廢止航空運(yùn)輸損害賠償責(zé)任限額[N];法制日?qǐng)?bào);2013年

8 韓 琳;定金責(zé)任與損害賠償責(zé)任能否同時(shí)適用[N];人民法院報(bào);2004年

9 中國(guó)社科院法學(xué)所研究員、法學(xué)博士 于 敏;機(jī)動(dòng)車(chē)損害賠償責(zé)任及其保險(xiǎn)的法律適用[N];人民法院報(bào);2006年

10 聶焱晶 西北政法大學(xué) 法學(xué)學(xué)士;收入錢(qián)財(cái) 為人消災(zāi)[N];衛(wèi)生與生活報(bào);2006年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 Q糜剿，

本文編號(hào)：2185333