初评鹿特丹规则下承运人制度.doc

初评《鹿特丹规则》下承运人责任制度摘 要承运人责任制度是海上货物运输法律的基础，《鹿特丹规则》对承运人责任制度在以往三大国际公约的基础上作出了重大的修改和创新，本文旨在通过其与其他公约和法律的比较分析，对其所作出的修改提出一些看法和建议第一章对《鹿特丹规则》的承运人责任基础加以分析，评价，《鹿特丹规则》从《海牙规则》的“不完全过失责任制”过渡到“完全过失责任制”，符合了海运立法的大趋势，但没有把握时机，建议在考虑现今海运环境和其他海事前提下，对“不完全过失责任制”作出渐进性的合理修改第二章承运人责任制度是使用范围和期间的扩大以及伴随着的“履约方”概念的引入，针对当今集装箱运输“门到门”的盛行和发展，适用范围和期间的扩展有其合理性，但一方面破坏了“网状责任制”，不利于当今国际集装箱多式联运的积极发展，对几种“履约方”当事人的身份进行了较为详尽的介绍和分析比较，让读者对其有了全面，清晰的了解，为第三章的“货物交付”和第四章的“控制权”中所涉及到得多方当事人之间的利益关系和对《鹿特丹规则》的相关尝试的合理性与否作出了一定的准备第三章讲到了《鹿特丹规则》下的货物交付问题，本章与第四章“控制权”是联系在一起的，确定了目的港“无人提货”是承运人的索赔对象，规定提单持有人没有必须提货的义务，有一定的合理性，而按“控制方”指示交付货物的规定容易在目的港对货物的常规交付带来不确定的影响。

第四章控制权是《鹿特丹规则》特有的概念，是以往海运公约中所没有的，“控制权”的引入打破了货物交付的惯常做法，也动摇了提单作为“物权凭证”的信用度，容易引起欺诈，以及要求担保的做法不利于托运人的资金流转，总的看来对托运人，承运人以及收货人都会带来较大的风险，没有达到立法预期第五章写到了承运人的识别，以及多式联运中各区段承运人的责任识别及“以藏瑕疵”，有鼓励“光船条款”的倾向，运用合理的方式对各区段承运人内部的责任区分并尽可能的明确“隐藏瑕疵”的产生，“隐藏瑕疵”产生时更为合理的使损失在各承运人之间分担第六章介绍《鹿特丹规则》的承运人责任限制，责任限制额有了大幅度的提高，加重了承运人的运输费用和风险，但该负担会直接或间接的转移到货方，在现在的条件下大幅度提高责任限制是不可取的第七章是结语，对整个论文结束和的一些个人主要观点的总结关键词：鹿特丹规则，承运人责任制度，履约方，控制方，责任限制ABSTRACTCarrier’s liability system is the foundation of the law of carriage of goods by sea,《Rotterdam Rules》has made enormous modifications and innovations on the basis of the past three international Conventions regarding the issue of Carrier’s liability system, the intention of the composition of this thesis is to put forward some personal views and suggestions concerning the modification made by the new Convention through the comparison with other Conventions as well as laws and regulations.In chapter one, analysis and comments have been presented on the Carrier’s liability system regulated by《Rotterdam Rules》that has fulfilled the abrupt transition between incomplete faulty liability system established in《Hague Rules》and complete faulty liability system, this transition has not seize the situation of the whole maritime business although accord with long-term trend of the regulation of shipping affairs, a proposal has been presented to recommend a gradual amendment on incomplete faulty liability system.In chapter two, the introduction of the concept of performing party along side with the expansion of extent and period supervised by Carrier’s liability system that accord with the popular and development of the “Door to Door” multimodal transportation, nevertheless, they are not favorable for the active advancement of international multimodal transit for they’ve breached the “network liability system” that has functioned well in multimodal transportation for so long. presentation about and comparison among some kinds of performing Party in details not only to give the readers a clear and all-around comprehension about them but also to make preparation for the comments in chapter three and four. In chapter three, the issue of delivery of the cargo under《Rotterdam Rules》have been presented to make sure that what the B/L holder have at the port of discharge is only a title to receive the cargo but not a obligation, this chapter is linked with the conception of “controlling party” in chapter four, delivery of cargo under the instruction of the controlling party probably make the traditional process of delivery of goods in a confused situation.In chapter four, the conception of controlling party has never seen in the past three international Convention concerning marine business has not kept its pace with the conventional practice of the delivery of cargo at terminal and also agitate the trust of the holder on B/L that serve as document of title in maritime common practice. In general, the introduction of controlling party possibly bring risks to not only shipper but also consignee and carrier.Chapter five is about the recognition of carrier that also contain carriers of all kinds of mode of transit in international multimodal transportation and the introduction of concealed damage. The clauses in《Rotterdam Rules》about the recognition of carrier reveal some kind of support to “demise clause”. Some reasonable approaches have been presented to make sure that where the concealed damage took place are basic theories to share the liability of compensation in a acceptable way.Chapter six explains the limits of liability under《Rotterdam Rules》that has made a immense increase compared with the past relevant Conventions, what it will probably bring to the carrier is the augment of cost and risk that both will possibly be transferred to shipper or consignee in a direct or indirect way. It’s not legitimate to rasie the limit by such a degree recently.Chapter seven is ending that to summarize the whole thesis and present some personal point of views. Nie Jing（International Law）Directed by Prof.Yao Hongxiu KEYWORDS：Rotterdam Rules, Carrier’s liability system, Performing party, Controlling party, Limits of liability- 57 -目 录引 言 .............................................................1第一章 承运人责任制度基础........。