서해안 기름 유출 사고와 삼성중공업의 배상책임

• 영문명: The Oil Spill in the West Sea of Korea and the Liabilities of Samsung Heavy Industries
• 발행기관: 한국사법학회(구 한국비교사법학회)
• 저자명: 김기창(Kee-Chang Kim)
• 간행물 정보: 『비교사법』比較私法 제15권 제3호, 1~44쪽, 전체 44쪽
• 주제분류: 법학 > 법학
• 파일형태: PDF
• 발행일자: 2008.09.30

영문 초록

  This article deals with the question of whether Samsung Heavy Industries (SHI) may limit its liability to compensate for the loss caused by the oil spill in the West Sea of Korea which followed the collision of SHI’s crane barge and an oil tanker. Since the crane barge and the tugs are not a ‘ship’ within the meaning of the Oil Pollution Damage Compensation Act (OPDCA), the OPDCA’s limitation of liability clause is not applicable to SHI. But Article 746 of Commercial Code provides a limitation of liability for shipowners in general.
  A ‘personal act’ of the shipowner would include omission as well. In the case of a corporate person, its representative’s act would no doubt constitute an act of the corporate person. Under certain circumstance, however, its employee’s act may also be regarded as a ‘personal act’ of the corporate shipowner.
  Whether the shipowner had ‘actual knowledge’ that the loss would probably occur is a matter of the subjective state of mind which can only be inferred from objectively available evidence. If there was an obvious risk that the shipowner’s act or omission would cause loss, then it is likely that the court may find, as a matter of inference, that the shipowner had actual knowledge. While the question of recklessness and actual knowledge are conceptually distinct, these two would stand or fall together in practice.
  The limitation of shipowner’s liability applies only to claims for compensation for a ‘loss’. If a third party who has no duty to take measures to neutralize the oil spill had neutralized the oil spill on behalf of the shipowner who has the duty, the third party’s claim for reimbursement of expenses for neutralization is not a claim for a ‘loss’. With regard to such a claim for reimbursement, the shipowner may not rely on the limitation of liability.

목차

Ⅰ. 사실 관계
Ⅱ. 선박소유자/선박임차인/용선자
Ⅲ. 적용 법규
Ⅳ. 선박충돌로 인한 배상책임: 분할 채무
Ⅴ. 선박소유자(선박임차인)의 책임제한
Ⅵ. 방제 비용 상환 채무
Ⅶ. 결론
【참고문헌】
[Abstract]

키워드

선박소유자의 책임제한 선박소유자의 의무 유류오염사고 해양오염 방지법 손해발생의 개연성 무모한 행위 감항능력 회사 자신의 행위 예인선 부선 유조선 방제비용 사무관리 Limitation of Shipowner’s Liability Shipowner’s Duty Oil Spill Marine Pollution Prevention Act Actual Knowledge Recklessness Seaworthiness Personal Act Alter Ego Tug Barge Tanker Neutralization Expenses Negotiorum Gestio