查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題名 | 船舶碰撞責任之研究=A Study on Liability for Ship Collision Accidents |
---|---|
作者 | 胡高強; Hu, Kao-Chiang; |
期刊 | 僑光技術學院通觀洞識學報 |
出版日期 | 20061200 |
卷期 | 6 民95.12 |
頁次 | 頁43-60 |
分類號 | 585.45 |
語文 | chi |
關鍵詞 | 船舶碰撞; 損害賠償; 民事責任; Vessel-to-vessel collision; Indemnity for damage; Civil liabilities; |
中文摘要 | 近代科技發達,雖船舶之預警性能與導航系統精確度大為提高,但船舶碰撞與海難意外事件還是處於相當高的比例,其原因以人為過失所造成的損害為主。常發生的人為過失有駕駛船舶不當、違反航行規則、港口規則、駕駛操作過失、未依國際公約設置安全設備、客輪超載、惡劣天候等情形。二○○四年一月四日我國籍「合鵬一號貨輪」與大陸「閩晉漁五四八七號」鐵殼漁船、二○○六年二月一日,一艘埃及籍渡輪「和平九八號」船難亦是典型案例。 船舶發生碰撞會產生民事責任、刑事與行政責任,一九一○年統一船舶碰撞若干法律規定的國際公約在民事方面有無過失、單方過失、雙方過失責任。確定船舶碰撞之一般過失在民法上是採抽象輕過失,要有善良之注意力,且以航海人員(包括船長、海員和引水人員等)於駕駛船舶及船東在管理船舶(例如是否提供適航船舶及保持良好狀態)過程中是否已作出通常技術和謹慎(Ordinary care and skill)行為。一九七四年國際海上人命安全公約附錄在客船安全證書設備記錄簿(格式p)上的修正與補充,亦對於客船救生艇與救生衣之安全數量列為檢查之重要設備。 船舶發生碰撞後,排除無過失之情形,有過失之一方或雙方當事船必須要有過失、碰撞事實、損害、過失與損害間要有因果關係等四項要件,船舶之損害賠償才能成立。有一九七四年國際海上人命安全公約一九八八年議定書賦予會員國制定合乎公約規範的標準,船舶及其設備於航行中應維持一定之適航性,當港口國有合理基礎相信船舶或其設備不能符合證書之標準或第十一條之規定時:港口國行政機關應禁止其出港,直到符合以上標準時,方可啟行。 我國籍「合鵬一號貨輪」與大陸「閩晉漁五四八七號」鐵殼漁船發生碰撞,就民事損害賠償責任,若是雙方過失責任,依我國海商法第九十七條與大陸海商法第一百六十九條第二項規定:依其過失程度之比例負其責任,不能判定其過失之輕重時,各方平均負其責任。 埃及籍渡輪「和平九八號」本次發生船難最主要的原因是未遵守相關安全規範,違反一九七四年國際海上人命安全公約一九八八年議定書之有關規定,埃及為該船之船旗國、沙烏地阿拉伯為港口國均未盡監督之責,使不合安全規定之客輪出港。「和平九八號」渡輪之船長及海員漁船難發生時,不顧旅客之安危,先逃離有違反相關國際條約之規定,應負起一定之責。 |
英文摘要 | Even though the precision of vessel forewarning function and navigation system are greatly improved under the development of modern scientific technology, shipping collisions and accidents of marine peril still take an alarmingly high ratio. The Taiwan-registered “HO-PING NO. 1 CARGO SHIP” collided with the iron-hull fishing boat, “MING-CHIEN - YU-5487”, from China, on January 4, 2004, and the shipwreck of “PEACE 98”, the Egyptian ferry-boat, on February 1, 2006, are the typical examples. The 1998 Protocol under the 1974 International Marine Human Life Safety Pact vests its member nations with the right to institute the standard in conformity with what are provided by the pact. Whenever a harbour nation is convinced, on rational basis, that a vessel or its equipments shall fail to comply with the norm set forth by the certificate or what are prescribed in Article 11: A vessel and its equipments shall maintain a definite seaworthiness during the voyage and the administrative authorities of a harbour nation shall interdict the vessel's departure from port until the standard is met prior to its sailing if such vessel is found non-conformed to the provisions. With regard to the civil liabilities for damage indemnity involving the vessel-to-vessel collision between the Taiwan-registered “HO-PING NO.1 CARGO SHIP” and the Chinese iron-hull fishing boat, “MING-CHIEN-YU-5487”, the liabilities for fault of both parties are subject to Article 97, Taiwan Maritime Law, and Article 169(2), Chinese Maritime Law: The extent of liabilities for faults shall be measured by the proportion, and both parties shall equally be responsible for the accident if the learned weight of liabilities to faults can be decided. In the matter of ship peril of Egyptian ferry-boat, “PEACE 98”, the non-conformity to the relevant safety norm was the prominent cause resultant from the violation of what are provided in the 1988 Protocol under the 1974 International Maritime Human Life Safety Pact. Both Egypt, the vessel flag nation, and Saudi Arabia, the harbour nation, had failed their supervisory duty by allowing a passenger vessel that violated the safety regulations depart from port. The captain and seamen of “PEACE 98” had totally ignored the passenger safety by escaping first from the wrecking ship shall be indeed liable to their offences against the provisions of the international pact. |
本系統之摘要資訊系依該期刊論文摘要之資訊為主。