海事机构实施强制清污条件及清污费用求偿的思考  

Consideration on the condition of enforcing compulsive pollution removal and pollution removal fee claim

作　　者：张聪超 胡婷婷 ZHANG Cong-chao;HU Ting-ting(Economic and Urban Construction Committee of Xiamen Municipal CPPCC,Xiamen,Fujian 361018,China;Xiamen Lujiang MSA,Xiamen,Fujian 361001,China)

机构地区：[1]厦门市政协经济城建委,福建厦门361018 [2]厦门鹭江海事处,福建厦门361001

出　　处：《中国海事》2020年第2期34-36,共3页China Maritime Safety

摘　　要：随着海上运输业的持续发展,船舶溢油事故风险也随之增加,发生船舶污染事故后,海事机构有权实施强制清污避免或者减少污染损害,但是对实施强制清污的条件及由此产生清污费用的求偿路径,理论与实务界存在诸多争议。文中由一起厦门海域发生的强制清污案例引发思考,从实务角度出发,用推演法分析实施强制清污的几种情况,探讨各清污主体之间的关系,得到清污单位直诉清污义务人合理结论,并给出实施该追偿路径的相关建议。With the continuous development of the maritime transport industry,the risk of oil spill accidents from ships also increases.After a ship pollution accident occurs,the maritime administration is entitled to carry out compulsory clean-up to avoid or reduce pollution damage.However,there are a lot of disputes in both theory and practice concerning the conditions for conducting mandatory clean-up and the channel for the compensation of the corresponding clean-up costs.The paper proceeds from a case of mandatory clean-up which occurred in Xiamen coastal area.From the practice perspective,it analyzes several situations of mandatory clean-up using the deduction method,and studies the relationship among various subjects of the mandatory clean-up.It draws the conclusion that it is reasonable for the clean-up organization to proceed directly against the obligator for pollution clean-up.It also proposes relevant suggestions on the approach for the recovery.

关 键 词：强制清污 清污费 代履行 索赔 

分 类 号：D993.5[政治法律—国际法学]