• Journal of Korea Port Economic Association
• /
• v.30 no.4
• /
• pp.111-130
• /
• 2014

The article 742(2) of the Korean Commercial Code allowed the third party to invoke a direct action against the insurer under a liability insurance. Meanwhile, the owners of the vessel enter into the P&I Insurance Contract with the P&I Club to indemnify all kinds of liability or expenses involved in the operation of its vessel. However, the Rule Book under the P&I Insurance mostly included the Pay to be Paid Clause which precludes the third party's direct action. Recently, the Seoul Central District Court passed a judgement on the validity of the Pay to be Paid Clause under the Korean law against the third party i.e. the cargo insurer having the right of subrogation. The court held that (1) the third party's right of direct action is not the right to claim insurance money but the right to claim damages against the P&I Club, (2) the insurer under a liability insurance is deemed to assume liability jointly and severally with the insured against the third party, (3) the Article 742(2) of the Korean Commercial Code is considered as a compulsory provision because it was invented to protect the innocent third party, the Paid to be Paid Clause is thus null and void. The purpose of this article is to evaluate the appropriateness of this court's judgments by comparative analysis of Korean and English law, and to suggest the relevant amendments of the Korean Commercial Code in order to prevent further legal disputes. The article criticizes the decision of the Seoul Central District Court, taking the attitude that, since the third party's right is the right to claim insurance money, the Paid to be Paid Clause is valid against the third party.

• Journal of Korea Port Economic Association
• /
• v.31 no.2
• /
• pp.41-53
• /
• 2015

In Paracomon Inc. v. Telus Communication, Realice's anchor became entangled with a working fiber-optic submarine cable during its voyage and are presentative of the shipowner(the captain) cut the cable. The owner of the cable brought a claim for the repair cost against the shipowner. The shipowner then advanced a third party claim against a liability insurance underwriter. The Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) held that the shipowner was entitled to limit its liability under the 1976 Convention on the Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims. The SCC also ruled that even though the misdeed of the shipowner was insufficient to break its right to limitation of liability, its wrongdoing constituted willful misconduct under the 1993 Canada Marine Insurance Act, allowing the underwriter to deny coverage for the incident. Thecasewasthefirsttoaddresstheinterrelationship between the shipowner's right to limit liability under the international convention regime and the availability of liability insurance with respect to such limited liability. This study analyzes the reasoning behind the SCC's judgment and evaluates the appropriateness of this court's decision based on the current maritime industry as well as prevailing maritime law. It concludes that the SCC's decision to declare that the shipowner retained the right to limit its liability is appropriate under the Limitation Convention (1976). However, its declaration that the liability insurer was discharged from liability is not correct in due consideration of the common recognition in the maritime industry, the intended purpose of a third party's right against the liability insurer, and the adoption process of the conduct barring limitation. Based on the SCC's decision, this study finally reviews the issue of the shipowner's right to limit and the coverage of the liability insurer in the Sewol case (2014).

• Journal of the Korean Society for Marine Environment & Energy
• /
• v.12 no.2
• /
• pp.104-110
• /
• 2009

This study tries to give improvement directions of the law of oil spill focusing on the view that satisfying remuneration for victims should be considered. And it looks through the existing remuneration system provided by P&I Club and IOPC Fund. It also covers with issues related to remuneration in order to find the best for victims. The major contents of this study are as follows. First, the present law of compensation security to Marine oil pollution accident should be revised. Maximum value of remuneration needs to be raised and subjects liable to pay reparation need to be expanded. Second, in case the damage is widely different comparing to similar cases in foreign countries, it's hard to get complete remuneration from international corporations responsible for reparation. That's the reason the national emergency system for oil pollution must be established. Third, this study says the law that certainly defines a liability subject and that the liability is not necessarily caused by fault should be enacted. Last, it suggest that victims should have their object income data to facilitate establishment of the law of compensation for damages from marine oil pollution. To calculate proper remuneration, government should consider to choose one of public organizations as an investigator to damages and should collect accurate statistics relating to fishery. Furthermore, compensation system which can provide rapid reparation to victims needs to established by founding professional maritime organization of arbitration.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Marine Environment & Safety
• /
• v.11 no.2 s.23
• /
• pp.41-49
• /
• 2005

In general, the criminal responsibility of seaman should always be directly assumed by the seamen, according to the principle of self-incrimination. Therefore, the only possible countermeasures for the criminal responsibility of seamen may be to reduce the responsibility by using criminal procedures (ex. the warrant substance examination system, the review system of legality for confinement as much as possible. Another possibility is to reduce the penalty through the revision of the law. In detail, concerning the problem of fine, the maximum fine for oil spill accidents by criminal negligence is KRW 30,000,000 under the current Ocean Pollution Prevention Act, and when an oil spill occurs, the maximum fine tends to be levied regardless of the amount of the spilled oil; thus, it is judged that grading the fine according to the amount of spilled oil may be worth considering. Regarding P & I's payment of fine, contrary to general belief, it is only possible to make up the loss when P & I takes up the legal responsibility or acknowledges its payment. In order to solve the problem, it is possible to consider the option of introducing new collective insurance program or mutual aid system. Also, as seamen are not specialists in legal issues, the ship owners' association or the marine afficers' association need to develop some program through which they can receive systematic assistance from legal specialists including lawyers when they encounter any legal problems (ex. free legal aid programs for farmers and fishermen). Finally, it may be possible to establish enact new laws or revise the existing Act on Special cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents to insert a new section on marine accidents.

• Proceedings of KOSOMES biannual meeting
• /
• 2006.11a
• /
• pp.175-179
• /
• 2006

With the rapid development of oil and chemical industry in the late 20C, massive transportation of oil by oil tanker vessel has grown and it caused the big oil pollution accidents. When oil spill from the oil tanker, damages reach into the astronomical figures in economically and damages affect wide area and many people with break the balance of ecosystem. Recently in Korea, the oil pollution accidents has occurred frequently as growing of oil consumption and it caused large-scale damages to the victim. Oil pollution in Korean offshore takes not only korean fishermen from their life ground and break the ecosystem but it takes too much time and money to recover. To minimize oil pollution damages, it is necessary to make pre-caution effort as a ship owner and relevant government bodies should endeavor to prevent from more damages. But once oil pollution accidents occurs in territorial sea, compensation for victim fishermen is very important. But it is true that compensation is not paid to victim smoothly. So this study aims at the problems of oil pollution compensation to the Korean victim and find the best way to get reasonable compensation.