“一带一路”视野下海运承运人“绕航责任”与“过错责任”的冲突与协调  

Conflict and Coordination between Deviation Liability and Fault Liability of Ocean Carrier from the Perspective of the Belt and Road Initiatives

作　　者：徐峰[1] XU Feng

机构地区：[1]上海海事大学法学院,上海201306

出　　处：《国际商务研究》2020年第3期76-84,共9页International Business Research

基　　金：上海市艺术科学规划重点项目“上海邮轮文化与法律保障研究”(项目编号:ZD2018G01);上海市人民政府决策咨询研究邮轮经济专项课题“我国邮轮营运安全保障立法的可行性研究”(项目编号:2018-ZJ11);中国法学会世界贸易组织法研究会项目“WTO框架下中国自由贸易港法律创新研究”(项目编号:CLS2018WTOZX09)。

摘　　要：为推动"一带一路"海上贸易顺利开展,对于沿线各国海上运输法的冲突应予以协调。就绕航行为而言,一部分国家加入《海牙规则》《维斯比规则》与《汉堡规则》,或将其转换为国内法适用,承运人承担海商法上的"绕航责任";另一部分沿线国家并未制定海上货运法,或未在货运法中设定绕航条款,承运人承担民商法上的"过错责任"。从"归责原则"与"免责事由"两方面分析,"绕航责任"比"过错责任"更轻,体现了法经济学上的效率性。我国应加入《鹿特丹规则》,将其作为区域性海上货物运输公约;或在《海商法》修改时,在保留原有绕航条款的基础上,并入公约相关规定,实现"求同存异"的战略目标。In order to promote the rapid development of the Belt and Road Initiatives on maritime trade,the conflict of Carriage of Goods by Sea Act(COGSA)of countries alongside shall be coordinated.As far as the deviation is concerned,some countries either accede to Hague Rules,Visby Rules and Hamburg Rules,or convert them into domestic law,the carrier undertakes the"deviation liability"in the maritime law;some other countries do not enact COGSA,or incorporate deviation clauses into the COGSA,the carrier takes the"fault liability"in the civil and commercial law."Deviation liability"is lower than"fault liability"from the aspects of"liability principle"and"exemption clause".The former shows the efficiency from the perspective of law and economics.China needs to adopt Rotterdam Rules as a Regional Convention on the Carriage of Goods by Sea,or retain the original provisions and incorporate clauses of the Convention when amending Chinese Maritime Law so as to achieve the strategic goal of"seeking common ground while reserving differences".

关 键 词：绕航责任 过错责任 归责原则 免责事由 求同存异 

分 类 号：DF961.9[政治法律—国际法学]