船舶优先权与责任限制的冲突与协调  

On the Conflict and Coordination of Maritime Lien and Limitation of Liability

作　　者：赵劲松 宋淑华 Zhao Jinsong;Song Shuhua(Shenzhen Research Institute,Shanghai Jiao Tong University,Shenzhen 518057,China;Sanya Institute of Cruise and Yacht,Sanya 572002,China)

机构地区：[1]上海交通大学深圳研究院,广东深圳518057 [2]三亚邮轮游艇研究院,海南三亚572002

出　　处：《中国海洋大学学报（社会科学版）》2021年第1期71-78,共8页Journal of Ocean University of China(Social Sciences)

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重大项目“完善我国海洋法律体系研究”(15ZDB178)。

摘　　要：对于船舶优先权和责任限制之间的关系,国内通说认为,由于《中华人民共和国海商法》第30条的规定,设立了海事赔偿责任限制基金之后,因为不能再申请扣押船舶,海事请求权人事实上不能再行使其享有的船舶优先权,两种法律制度之间存在冲突。为探究海事赔偿责任限制基金,是否能导致船舶优先权事实上被消灭,采用船舶代位性原则,对英、美法律相关判例进行梳理和分析,同时与国内学者的观点进行比较,得出结论认为两者不仅没有冲突,同时海事赔偿责任限制基金的一部分构成限制性债权所享有的船舶优先权的客体。It is prevalent in China's Mainland that,after an limitation fund for maritime liability was established,in accordance with Article 30 of China Maritime Code,the maritime lien attached to the relevant vessels will be virtually extinguished as the claimants will be unable to apply for arresting the ship,therefore it is believed that there is a conflict between these two regimes.For the sake of investigating whether such a conflict exists,adopting the rational substitutes of ships under English law,and comparing the rules set up by various relevant leading authorities under English and American admiralty case laws with those studies by Chinese domestic scholars,the results show that the so called conflict does not exist,and that the limitation fund constitutes the objects of maritime liens for limitable claims.

关 键 词：船舶优先权 海事赔偿责任限制基金 船舶代位性 客体 

分 类 号：D913.993[政治法律—民商法学]