애스크로AIPublic Preview
← 학술논문 검색
학술논문상사판례연구2012.03 발행KCI 피인용 2

상법상 해상운송인의 운송물에 관한 주의의무(제795조)의 해석론적 비교 검토

Comparative Study on Construction of Article 795(1) of Korean Commercial Code

양석완(제주대학교)

25권 1호, 311~349쪽

초록

In the Article Ⅲ(1) of Hague-Visby Rules, subject to the provisions of Article Ⅳ, the carrier shall properly and carefully load, handle, stow, carry, keep, care for, and discharge the goods carried. This Article is adopted in Article 795(1) of Korean Commercial Code, but with some variation. The standard of ‘properly and carefully’ is not different from that of ‘due diligence’ in Korean Commercial Code. Hague-Visby Rules imposes some specific obligations about how the carrier must perform its contract, for example, and detail some of the legal consequences of the carrier's failure to perform, but it does not explicitly declare the carrier's most basic obligation simply to perform the core contract. However, the Rotterdam Rules' treatment of carrier's obligations begins by making explicit what the Hague-Visby Rules leaves implicit. Article 11 declares, in essence, that the carrier must perform the core obligations under its contract. It employs what has often been described as a ‘reversed burden of proof’, meaning that carrier (typically the defendant) must disprove its fault in order to escape liability (once the claimant has established a prima facie case). This differs from the allocation commonly employed in many jurisdictions to determine fault-based liability under which the plaintiff must prove the defendant's fault as part of its affirmative case in order to recover.

Abstract

In the Article Ⅲ(1) of Hague-Visby Rules, subject to the provisions of Article Ⅳ, the carrier shall properly and carefully load, handle, stow, carry, keep, care for, and discharge the goods carried. This Article is adopted in Article 795(1) of Korean Commercial Code, but with some variation. The standard of ‘properly and carefully’ is not different from that of ‘due diligence’ in Korean Commercial Code. Hague-Visby Rules imposes some specific obligations about how the carrier must perform its contract, for example, and detail some of the legal consequences of the carrier's failure to perform, but it does not explicitly declare the carrier's most basic obligation simply to perform the core contract. However, the Rotterdam Rules' treatment of carrier's obligations begins by making explicit what the Hague-Visby Rules leaves implicit. Article 11 declares, in essence, that the carrier must perform the core obligations under its contract. It employs what has often been described as a ‘reversed burden of proof’, meaning that carrier (typically the defendant) must disprove its fault in order to escape liability (once the claimant has established a prima facie case). This differs from the allocation commonly employed in many jurisdictions to determine fault-based liability under which the plaintiff must prove the defendant's fault as part of its affirmative case in order to recover.

발행기관:
한국상사판례학회
DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/
분류:
법학

AI 법률 상담

이 논문의 주제에 대해 더 알고 싶으신가요?

460만+ 법률 자료에서 관련 판례·법령·해석례를 찾아 답변합니다

AI 상담 시작
상법상 해상운송인의 운송물에 관한 주의의무(제795조)의 해석론적 비교 검토 | 상사판례연구 2012 | AskLaw | 애스크로 AI