“互相免赔”原则研究——以SUPPLYTIME 2017第14条（a）款为例  

On Knock-for-Knock Principle: Analysis of SUPPLYTIME 2017 Clause 14(a)

作　　者：韩赟斐 HUANG Yuxin HAN Yunfei(Shanghai Maritime Court)

机构地区：[1]上海海事法院

出　　处：《中华海洋法学评论》2019年第4期114-148,共35页China Oceans Law Review

基　　金：上海海事大学研究生创新基金资助项目（YXR2017022）结项成果~~

摘　　要：2017年6月,波罗的海航运公会发布了新版的海工服务船舶标准定期租船合同,代号SUPPLYTIME 2017。SUPPLYTIME 2017在旧版本的基础上进行了较多修改,其中第14条"责任与赔偿条款"(a)款即为"互相免赔"条款。SUPPLYTIME 2017通过扩大"出租人集团"和"承租人集团"的定义、减少"但书"内容、扩大"致损原因"范围等,使"互相免赔"条款更加适应当今的航运市场。本文通过梳理"互相免赔"条款的历史沿革、分析英国司法实践中的相关判例、对比新老版本的SUPPLYTIME,明确了对待SUPPLYTIME 2017"互相免赔"条款的应有态度是:既不冒进使用,也不无理由拒绝或排斥。In June 2017,the Baltic and International Maritime Council launched a revised version of its standard time charter party for offshore support vessels,codename as SUPPLYTIME 2017.SUPPLYTIME 2017 contains several changes based on SUPPLYTIME 2005,especially in the Clause 14(a)(Liabilities and Indemnities–Knock-for-Knock).SUPPLYTIME 2017 makes the knock-for-knock clauses better adapted to the current shipping market by extending the range of“Owners’Group”and“Charterers’Group”respectively,reducing the content of Proviso,and expanding the content of“Cause of Loss”.Through reviewing the history of knock-for-knock clauses,analyzing relevant legal precedents in British judicial practice,and comparing SUPPLYTIME 2005 with SUPPLYTIME 2017,this paper makes it clear that the knock-for-knock clauses of SUPPLYTIME 2017 shall not be boldly used nor unreasonably resisted or excluded.

关 键 词：SUPPLYTIME 2017 “互相免赔”条款 海工服务船舶 

分 类 号：F551[经济管理—产业经济]