On the Effect of the Abolition of the Exemption from Liability for Nautical Fault in the Rotterdam Rules

Wanqian Luo; Yizhen Zhang; Chaoyang Yang

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ijls.20230604.15

Research Article |

| Peer-Reviewed

On the Effect of the Abolition of the Exemption from Liability for Nautical Fault in the Rotterdam Rules

Wanqian Luo, Yizhen Zhang, Chaoyang Yang

Published in International Journal of Law and Society (Volume 6, Issue 4)

Received: 15 November 2023 Accepted: 6 December 2023 Published: 18 December 2023

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

Whether to cancel the nautical fault exemption has always been the focus of discussion in the international shipping circles. There have always been two views in the field of maritime law: abolishing and retaining the nautical fault exemption. The Rotterdam Rules, on the surface, abolished the nautical fault exemption, but in practice, the burden of proof was borne by consignee, which to some extent retained the exemption. The Rotterdam Rules, as a highly comprehensive international convention, have received much attention since its introduction. The provisions on the abolition of maritime fault exemption are the focus of attention, so it is also very meaningful to study the core of the Rotterdam Rules, namely the preservation or abolition of the maritime fault exemption system. This article analyzes the principle of carrier liability, and discusses the views of abolishing and retaining the exemption from maritime fault in the Rotterdam Rules, in order to study the impact of abolishing the exemption from maritime fault in the Rotterdam Rules. In addition, the article also proposes solutions to the issue of carrier liability principle in the Rotterdam Rules. Identify the loopholes in the opposing views of canceling or retaining the exemption for maritime negligence, and refute them, demonstrating that both views are partially reasonable and not entirely reasonable. And various cases were listed, reflecting the measures taken by British courts to address the issues arising from maritime fault exemption.

Published in	International Journal of Law and Society (Volume 6, Issue 4)
DOI	10.11648/j.ijls.20230604.15
Page(s)	283-292
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Nautical Fault Exemption, Carrier Liability Principle, Balance of Interests

References

[1]	Xing Haibao. Maritime bill of lading method [M]. Beijing: Law Publishing House, 1999.
[2]	Huang Yaping. Trial Discussion on "Navigation Accretion of Naution, World Maritime Transport, 2005.
[3]	Tian Tian. Research on Maritime Law [M]. Hefei: University of Science and Technology of China Press, 1999.
[4]	Joseph C. Sweeney. The UNCITRAL Draft Convention on Carriage of Goods by Sea [J]. Part I, 7J. Mar. L. & Com. 69, 1975.
[5]	Synopsis of Response to the Consultation Paper. 1957.
[6]	Zheng Yubo. Maritime Law [M] Taipei: Sanmin Book Bureau, 2003.
[7]	Yang Renshou. Maritime Law [M] Taipei: Sanmin Book Bureau Co., Ltd., 1985.
[8]	Si Yuzhuo, Special Research on Maritime Law [V]. Dalian: Dalian Maritime University Press, 2002.
[9]	Zhang Xinping, Maritime Law [M]. Taipei: Wunan Book Publishing House, 2002.
[10]	Zhang Liying, Maritime Business Law [M] Beijing: Higher Education Press, 2006.
[11]	Huang Teng, On the Abolition of the Maritime Fault Exemption System in the Transportation of Goods by Unmanned Intelligent Ships [J]. Special Zone Economy, 2020.
[12]	Zhou Zhechang, A Legal Study on the Airworthiness Obligations of Carriers [J]. Journal of Guizhou Education University, 2023.
[13]	Shan Hongjun, Systematic Development of Fault Norms for International Maritime Carriers: Based on the Interpretation Theory of Maritime Law [J]. Social Scientist, 2021.
[14]	Fu Tingzhong, Chinese Maritime Legislation on the Road to a Maritime Power [J]. The Pearl River Water Transport, 2023.
[15]	Wang Xuyong, Legal Conflict in the Application of Multimodal Transport Contracts under the Background of the Rotterdam Rules [J]. China Water Transport, 2021.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Luo, W., Zhang, Y., Yang, C. (2023). On the Effect of the Abolition of the Exemption from Liability for Nautical Fault in the Rotterdam Rules. International Journal of Law and Society, 6(4), 283-292. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20230604.15

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Luo, W.; Zhang, Y.; Yang, C. On the Effect of the Abolition of the Exemption from Liability for Nautical Fault in the Rotterdam Rules. Int. J. Law Soc. 2023, 6(4), 283-292. doi: 10.11648/j.ijls.20230604.15

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Luo W, Zhang Y, Yang C. On the Effect of the Abolition of the Exemption from Liability for Nautical Fault in the Rotterdam Rules. Int J Law Soc. 2023;6(4):283-292. doi: 10.11648/j.ijls.20230604.15

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijls.20230604.15,
  author = {Wanqian Luo and Yizhen Zhang and Chaoyang Yang},
  title = {On the Effect of the Abolition of the Exemption from Liability for Nautical Fault in the Rotterdam Rules},
  journal = {International Journal of Law and Society},
  volume = {6},
  number = {4},
  pages = {283-292},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijls.20230604.15},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20230604.15},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijls.20230604.15},
  abstract = {Whether to cancel the nautical fault exemption has always been the focus of discussion in the international shipping circles. There have always been two views in the field of maritime law: abolishing and retaining the nautical fault exemption. The Rotterdam Rules, on the surface, abolished the nautical fault exemption, but in practice, the burden of proof was borne by consignee, which to some extent retained the exemption. The Rotterdam Rules, as a highly comprehensive international convention, have received much attention since its introduction. The provisions on the abolition of maritime fault exemption are the focus of attention, so it is also very meaningful to study the core of the Rotterdam Rules, namely the preservation or abolition of the maritime fault exemption system. This article analyzes the principle of carrier liability, and discusses the views of abolishing and retaining the exemption from maritime fault in the Rotterdam Rules, in order to study the impact of abolishing the exemption from maritime fault in the Rotterdam Rules. In addition, the article also proposes solutions to the issue of carrier liability principle in the Rotterdam Rules. Identify the loopholes in the opposing views of canceling or retaining the exemption for maritime negligence, and refute them, demonstrating that both views are partially reasonable and not entirely reasonable. And various cases were listed, reflecting the measures taken by British courts to address the issues arising from maritime fault exemption.
},
 year = {2023}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - On the Effect of the Abolition of the Exemption from Liability for Nautical Fault in the Rotterdam Rules
AU  - Wanqian Luo
AU  - Yizhen Zhang
AU  - Chaoyang Yang
Y1  - 2023/12/18
PY  - 2023
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20230604.15
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijls.20230604.15
T2  - International Journal of Law and Society
JF  - International Journal of Law and Society
JO  - International Journal of Law and Society
SP  - 283
EP  - 292
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2640-1908
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20230604.15
AB  - Whether to cancel the nautical fault exemption has always been the focus of discussion in the international shipping circles. There have always been two views in the field of maritime law: abolishing and retaining the nautical fault exemption. The Rotterdam Rules, on the surface, abolished the nautical fault exemption, but in practice, the burden of proof was borne by consignee, which to some extent retained the exemption. The Rotterdam Rules, as a highly comprehensive international convention, have received much attention since its introduction. The provisions on the abolition of maritime fault exemption are the focus of attention, so it is also very meaningful to study the core of the Rotterdam Rules, namely the preservation or abolition of the maritime fault exemption system. This article analyzes the principle of carrier liability, and discusses the views of abolishing and retaining the exemption from maritime fault in the Rotterdam Rules, in order to study the impact of abolishing the exemption from maritime fault in the Rotterdam Rules. In addition, the article also proposes solutions to the issue of carrier liability principle in the Rotterdam Rules. Identify the loopholes in the opposing views of canceling or retaining the exemption for maritime negligence, and refute them, demonstrating that both views are partially reasonable and not entirely reasonable. And various cases were listed, reflecting the measures taken by British courts to address the issues arising from maritime fault exemption.

VL  - 6
IS  - 4
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Wanqian Luo

Law School, Shanghai Maritime University, Shanghai, China

Contact Email
Yizhen Zhang

Law School, Shanghai Maritime University, Shanghai, China

Contact Email
Chaoyang Yang

Wintell & Co Law Firm, Shanghai, China

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Luo, W., Zhang, Y., Yang, C. (2023). On the Effect of the Abolition of the Exemption from Liability for Nautical Fault in the Rotterdam Rules. International Journal of Law and Society, 6(4), 283-292. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20230604.15

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Luo, W.; Zhang, Y.; Yang, C. On the Effect of the Abolition of the Exemption from Liability for Nautical Fault in the Rotterdam Rules. Int. J. Law Soc. 2023, 6(4), 283-292. doi: 10.11648/j.ijls.20230604.15

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Luo W, Zhang Y, Yang C. On the Effect of the Abolition of the Exemption from Liability for Nautical Fault in the Rotterdam Rules. Int J Law Soc. 2023;6(4):283-292. doi: 10.11648/j.ijls.20230604.15

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijls.20230604.15,
  author = {Wanqian Luo and Yizhen Zhang and Chaoyang Yang},
  title = {On the Effect of the Abolition of the Exemption from Liability for Nautical Fault in the Rotterdam Rules},
  journal = {International Journal of Law and Society},
  volume = {6},
  number = {4},
  pages = {283-292},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijls.20230604.15},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20230604.15},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijls.20230604.15},
  abstract = {Whether to cancel the nautical fault exemption has always been the focus of discussion in the international shipping circles. There have always been two views in the field of maritime law: abolishing and retaining the nautical fault exemption. The Rotterdam Rules, on the surface, abolished the nautical fault exemption, but in practice, the burden of proof was borne by consignee, which to some extent retained the exemption. The Rotterdam Rules, as a highly comprehensive international convention, have received much attention since its introduction. The provisions on the abolition of maritime fault exemption are the focus of attention, so it is also very meaningful to study the core of the Rotterdam Rules, namely the preservation or abolition of the maritime fault exemption system. This article analyzes the principle of carrier liability, and discusses the views of abolishing and retaining the exemption from maritime fault in the Rotterdam Rules, in order to study the impact of abolishing the exemption from maritime fault in the Rotterdam Rules. In addition, the article also proposes solutions to the issue of carrier liability principle in the Rotterdam Rules. Identify the loopholes in the opposing views of canceling or retaining the exemption for maritime negligence, and refute them, demonstrating that both views are partially reasonable and not entirely reasonable. And various cases were listed, reflecting the measures taken by British courts to address the issues arising from maritime fault exemption.
},
 year = {2023}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - On the Effect of the Abolition of the Exemption from Liability for Nautical Fault in the Rotterdam Rules
AU  - Wanqian Luo
AU  - Yizhen Zhang
AU  - Chaoyang Yang
Y1  - 2023/12/18
PY  - 2023
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20230604.15
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijls.20230604.15
T2  - International Journal of Law and Society
JF  - International Journal of Law and Society
JO  - International Journal of Law and Society
SP  - 283
EP  - 292
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2640-1908
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20230604.15
AB  - Whether to cancel the nautical fault exemption has always been the focus of discussion in the international shipping circles. There have always been two views in the field of maritime law: abolishing and retaining the nautical fault exemption. The Rotterdam Rules, on the surface, abolished the nautical fault exemption, but in practice, the burden of proof was borne by consignee, which to some extent retained the exemption. The Rotterdam Rules, as a highly comprehensive international convention, have received much attention since its introduction. The provisions on the abolition of maritime fault exemption are the focus of attention, so it is also very meaningful to study the core of the Rotterdam Rules, namely the preservation or abolition of the maritime fault exemption system. This article analyzes the principle of carrier liability, and discusses the views of abolishing and retaining the exemption from maritime fault in the Rotterdam Rules, in order to study the impact of abolishing the exemption from maritime fault in the Rotterdam Rules. In addition, the article also proposes solutions to the issue of carrier liability principle in the Rotterdam Rules. Identify the loopholes in the opposing views of canceling or retaining the exemption for maritime negligence, and refute them, demonstrating that both views are partially reasonable and not entirely reasonable. And various cases were listed, reflecting the measures taken by British courts to address the issues arising from maritime fault exemption.

VL  - 6
IS  - 4
ER  -

Copy | Download