:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:關於《鹿特丹規則》第26條與第82條之適用--從海上貨物運送人責任單一說與分割說進行觀察
書刊名:航運季刊
作者:方凱弘司玉琢
作者(外文):Fang, Kai-hongSi, Yu-zhuo
出版日期:2019
卷期:28:1
頁次:頁1-21
主題關鍵詞:海上貨物運送人責任單一說分割說例外從嚴解釋原則先程序後實體原則Responsibility of marine carriersTheory of single responsibilityTheory of separated responsibilityPrinciple of strict explanation for exceptionPrinciple of priority application for procedure law
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:6
  • 點閱點閱:2
海上貨物運送人之責任期間,「戶至戶」之運送範圍顯然包括海上與陸上,此一「收受到交付」之全運送路段,是否全部為海商法(海法)所適用亦或有民法(陸法)適用,學界有「單一說」與「分割說」之爭。《鹿特丹規則》第12條第1款規定,「運送人根據本公約對貨物的責任期間,自運送人或履約方為運送而接收貨物時開始,至貨物交付時終止」,擴大適用範圍,採取了「海運+其他」模式,調整的不只是海運部分,倘產生與其他國際公約之衝突時,應依第26條與第82條來解決,惟適用範圍與適用順序有爭議;本文認為,基於海上貨物運送人責任「單一說」之理論前提,第26條為第12條的例外,有「例外從嚴解釋原則」之適用,而第26條與第82條性質不同,依「先程序後實體原則」,第82條應優先適用。
Regarding to the period of responsibility of marine carriers, the" door-to-door" delivery occurs at sea and in land obviously. We have the dispute between "theory of single responsibility" and "theory of separated responsibility" in Taiwan academia if it is applied to the maritime law (sea law) only or the civil law (land law) included. Paragraph 1 of article 12 (period of responsibility of the carrier) of the Rotterdam Rules says," The period of responsibility of the carrier for the goods under this convention begins when the carrier or a performing party receives the goods for carriage and ends when the goods are delivered." The application is extended as the mode of"shipping plus other" that not adjusted for maritime transportation only. Articles 26 and 82 could deal with those accordingly if any conflicts happen among other international conventions. However, the application and priority of these articles are still confused. In this article, based on the legislation from the spirit of "theory of single responsibility" in the carriage of goods by sea, article 26 is the exception of article 12 and it could be applied to the principle of strict explanation for exception. The principles of explanation to articles 26 and 82 are different essentially. We apply article 82 firstly because of the priority application of procedure law.
期刊論文
1.楊仁壽(19840600)。論海牙規則對我國海商法之影響:從海牙規則看我國海商法就「海上運送單一說」有關理論之實踐。法令月刊,35(6),10-13。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.黃柏夫(1984)。海上運送人何時完成運送契約義務?談海商法第93 條第3 項與第100 條之關係。萬國法律,18。  延伸查詢new window
3.榮璞(2012)。《鹿特丹規則》若干疑難問題綜述。中國海商法研究,2012(4),12-18。  延伸查詢new window
4.Neels, P.(2011)。The Rotterdam Rules and modern transport practices: a successful marriage?。Tijdschrift Vervoer & Recht,1,1-18。  new window
研究報告
1.王穆衡、張志清、李佳逸、陳一平、陳其華、林妲欣(2011)。鹿特丹規則 之影響分析與海商法修法先期規劃。  延伸查詢new window
學位論文
1.林恩山(1991)。海商法上運送人免責事由之研究(博士論文)。國立政治大學。new window  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.司玉琢、韓立新(2009)。《鹿特丹規則》研究。大連海事大學出版社。  延伸查詢new window
2.張新平(2004)。海商法。台北:五南。  延伸查詢new window
3.劉宗榮(1996)。海商法。台北:三民。  延伸查詢new window
4.楊仁壽(2015)。鹿特丹規則。臺北市:三民。  延伸查詢new window
5.楊仁壽(2000)。最新海商法論。三民書局。  延伸查詢new window
6.尹章華、徐國勇(2000)。海商法。臺北市:元照。  延伸查詢new window
7.司玉琢(2007)。海商法。法律。  延伸查詢new window
8.司玉琢(2010)。海商法專論。大連市:中國人民大學。  延伸查詢new window
9.梁宇賢(1999)。海商法精義。瑞興圖書公司。  延伸查詢new window
10.張特生(1998)。海商法實務問題專論。五南圖書出版股份有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
11.朱曾傑、吳煥寧、張永堅、郭瑜(2011)。《鹿特丹規則》釋義聯合國全程或部分海上國際貨物運輸契約公約。北京市:中國商務出版社。  延伸查詢new window
12.黃裕凱(20140000)。鹿特丹規則。臺北:航貿文化。new window  延伸查詢new window
13.蔡佩芬(2017)。海商法。元照出版有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
14.賴來焜(2002)。最新海商法論。臺北市:學林文化事業有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
15.Berlingieri, F.(2012)。An analysis of two recent commentaries on the Rotterdam Rules。  new window
16.施智謀(1999)。海商法。三民書局。  延伸查詢new window
其他
1.Honka, H.(2009)。United Nations convention on contracts for the International Carrage of Goods wholly or partly by sea, scope of application and freedom of contract,http://www.rotterdamrules2009.com/cms/uploads/Def.%20tekst%20Hannu%20Honka.pdf。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE