国际海上班轮货物运输合同中强制性规则的适当性

发布时间：2018-04-14 20:25

本文选题：运输合同 + 契约自由　；参考：《中国法学》2016年06期

【摘要】：当法律需要实现的目标是对公共利益的维护时,强制性规则是必要的,但当法律试图调整承托双方之间的利益公平时,就产生了强制性是否需要和进行干预程度的问题。强制性规则虽然对国际海上班轮货物运输合同责任的公平性分配、保护货方利益发挥了重要的作用,但其整体效果仍有待进一步研究。强制性规则的缺陷集中体现在责任的固定上,这会削弱效率价值的发挥,而是否取消强制性干预主要是由船货双方谈判势力的平等性所决定的。目前的航运事实未能证明承运人继续和长期拥有这种优势的谈判地位,承托双方谈判势力趋向平等,从而为契约自由提供了基础。基于国际班轮运输的部分长期合作性合同中承托双方谈判势力趋向平等,《鹿特丹规则》中制定了批量合同,回归契约自由原则,以构建一个整体上有实效的,但应受到一种最低限度的航运安全、公共利益与公序良俗限制的航运秩序。这代表了当今国际海上班轮货物运输合同中强制性的干预程度、强制性规则与任意性规则平衡发展的趋势。
[Abstract]:When the goal of the law is to safeguard the public interest, mandatory rules are necessary, but when the law tries to adjust the equity of the interests between the two parties, the question of whether or not the compulsory need and the degree of intervention arises.Although the mandatory rules play an important role in the fair distribution of the liability and the protection of the interests of the cargo parties, the overall effect of the rules remains to be further studied.The limitation of mandatory rules is mainly reflected in the fixed liability, which will weaken the exertion of efficiency value, and whether or not to cancel the mandatory intervention is mainly determined by the equality of the negotiating power between the ship and the cargo parties.The current shipping facts fail to prove that the carrier continues to have this advantage for a long time, and that the negotiation forces of both parties tend to be equal, thus providing the basis for the freedom of contract.Based on the fact that in part of the long-term cooperative contracts for international liner shipping, the negotiating forces of both parties tend to be equal, the "Rotterdam rules" have formulated bulk contracts and returned to the principle of freedom of contract, in order to build an overall and effective one.However, the shipping order should be restricted by a minimum of shipping safety, public interest and public order.This represents the trend of the balance between compulsory and arbitrary rules in the international contract for the carriage of goods by sea.
【作者单位】：南开大学法学院;
【分类号】：D996.19

【相似文献】