查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 電子機票在華沙公約體系下所衍生的相關法律問題=Legal Issues As Derived from Electronic Ticketing under Warsaw Convention System |
---|---|
作 者 | 譚湘龍; | 書刊名 | 民航季刊 |
卷 期 | 1:4 1999.12[民88.12] |
頁 次 | 頁427-448 |
分類號 | 557.92 |
關鍵詞 | 電子機票; 華沙公約; 海牙議定書; 華沙公約體系; 機票的定義; 機票的交付; 註明通知; 登機; 管轄; Electronic ticketing; Warsaw convention; The Hague protocol; Warsaw convention system; Definition of tickets; Delivery of tickets; Notice; Embarkation; Jurisdiction; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 亳無疑問地,電子機票的時代已經到來,不僅訂位和購票的程序已經相對地簡化,航空公司降低成本的效果亦已突顯出來,同時強化了競爭的機制,最終對消費者在機票價格上產生實惠的效果。 然而,電子機票或無票旅行並非全無蠢可議之處,尤其是將國際航空運送與華沙公約體系的關係聯繫起來,基本的觀念問題隨之浮出臺面,令吾人不敢加以輕視。 就航空公司而言,其最重視的就是電子機票所衍生的法律問題,尤其是在華沙公約體系的法律架構下航空運送人能夠主張的免除或限制責任的權利;盡管這是華沙公約體系建立來就成為不斷出現的老問題。毌庸置疑,無票旅行的關念,顯然不是華沙公約制定當時所能預見者。在華沙公約體系下,既未對機票加以定義,則對機票的分析及其所衍生的法律問題之解決,勢必須從解釋的角度切入。不消說,採用何種解釋的方法,自然就會影響到華沙公約體系適用的正確性,故應謹慎為之。 此外, 電子機票所衍生的另一個重要法律問題,係關於法庭地的選擇,即華沙公約體系中關於管轄權的選擇問題。而在四個管轄權中,「訂立契約之機構所在地」所產生的問題最多,甚至造成乘客被迫至外國法院提出訴訟之機率大增,亟待吾人予以解決。 |
英文摘要 | It is no doubt for us to declare that the era for utilizing the electronic ticketing has come. This means not only that the process in the making of reservations of tickets and its purchase thereof is relatively simplified but that the airlines succeed in the reducing of their operating costs as well. In the meantime, electronic tickets strengthen the mechanism of competition in air transport markets and a fortiori, ultimately benefit consumers in due course in terms of cheap fares. Nevertheless, electronic ticketing or ticketless travel produces more often than not controversies, particularly arising within the scope of international air transport involving issues relevant to basic concept of the Warsaw Convention System that deserves our care to be taken most carefully. Insofar as airlines are concerned, they usually take into serious consideration legal issues arising from the employment of electronic ticketing, particularly in the legal framework of the Warsaw Convention System, with a view to claiming to be entitled to enjoy rights to exclude or limit liability there-under, irrespective of the fact that the issues recur since the Warsaw Convention had been signed in 1929. Without doubt, the concept of ticketless travel was not anticipated in the circumstances surrounding the adoption of the Warsaw Convention. Under the Warsaw Convention System, since there is no particular provision defining what constitutes a ticket, it is inevitable to interpret it in its context in an attempt to resolve the issues with regard to the analysis of tickets and their derivative legal issues. Needless to say, it is natural that the approach we choose to interpret will have to affect correctness in the application of the Warsaw Convention System. In this regard, it is advisable for us to interpret it in a manner with cautiousness. In addition, another important issue arising from the electronic tickets relates to the shopping of forum, i.e., the issue pertinent to jurisdiction over the particular case under the Warsaw Convention System. It is also controversial as to what "place of business through which the contract has been made" really means among the four bases of jurisdiction stipulated thereunder. The consequence could be that the passenger might be compelled to bring a lawsuit in a court outside the state where he resides. For the sake of emergency, this is seemingly the issue we should have devoted ourselves to its resolution. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。