• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.4
• /
• pp.43-67
• /
• 1992

• Magazine of the Korea Concrete Institute
• /
• v.17 no.1 s.84
• /
• pp.44-48
• /
• 2005

• The tire
• /
• s.179
• /
• pp.15-26
• /
• 1995

이 자료는 일본의 동화화재해상보험주식회사 화재신종사업부 신종그룹 과장대리 등전일유씨가 ‘일본고무협회지’ 1994년 9월호에 ‘PL입법과기업의とるべき대책’이라는 표제로 기고한 내용을 번역한 것이다. 역자 주

• 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).

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.50
• /
• pp.139-161
• /
• 2011

The retroactive insurance is the system that the Assured, the principal of insurance contract shall be entitled to recover for insured(beneficiary in insurance of persons) loss during the period of insurance covered by this insurance, not withstanding that the loss had occurred before the contract of insurance concluded. The retroactive insurance is applicable to both property insurance and insurance of persons. The commercial law of Korea stipulates its rules in the insurance volume. The ultimate and definite articles of cargo insurance about the retroactive insurance are stipulated in MIA and ICC. In general insurance of persons stipulates relevant articles in the clause. Even though articles pertinent to the retroactive insurance are written explicitly in relevant law, it is difficult to settle the claim just by using specified rules of related regulations. Therefore, a claim is settled down based on the actual facts. After studying some of the actual dispute facts connected with the retroactive insurance having properties mentioned, this paper suggests controversial points and alternative ideas.

• 방재와보험
• /
• s.36
• /
• pp.31-33
• /
• 1988

1960년대까지는 저팽창단백포가 유류화재의 진압에 주로 사용되었으니 불소화합물 계면활성제로부터 유출된 합성 AFFF를 개발하면서 해수로도 이의 사용이 가능하고 지역 및 유출화재 예방에서 AFFF 특유의 초기진압효과 및 대형화재를 방지한다는 장점 때문에 널리 사용되고 있으며, 석유화학산업의 저장탱크지역 및 공정지역에서 AFFF와 FPF가 주로 사용되며 부두시설(Oilrig, Marine Tanker, 해상 / 해변터미널)에는 AFFF의 사용이 지배적이다. 현재 사용되고 있는 foam으로는 단백포(Protein: PF), 불화단백포(Fluoroprotein: FPF), 막형성 불화단백포(Film Forming Fluoroprotein Foam: FFFP), 고팽창폼(High Expansion Foam), 수성막 형성폼(Aqueous Film Foaming Foam: AFFF), 알콜폼(Alcohol Resistant Foam: ATD) 등이 있으니 본고에서는 AFFF 중심으로 소개한다.

• Maritime Security
• /
• v.6 no.1
• /
• pp.37-56
• /
• 2023

Recently, with the rapid development of ICT(Information and Communication Technology) and AI(Artificial Intelligence) technology industries, the emergence of MASS(Maritime Autonomous Surface Ship), which were thought only in the distant future, is approaching a reality. Along with the development of these amazing technologies, changes in the private law sector, such as liability, compensation for damages, and maritime insurance, as well as in the public law sector, such as maritime safety, marine environment protection, and maintenance of maritime order, have become necessary in the field of maritime law. In particular, with the advent of a new type of ship called MASS that does not have a crew on board, the kind and type of liability, compensation for damages, and insurance contracts in the event of a marine accident will also change. In this paper, the general theory about concept, classification, effectiveness and future of MASS and the general theory about concept and various obligations and responsibilities under the maritime law for discussion of MASS are reviewed. Next, in addition, regarding the problems that may occur in the event of a marine accident from MASS, the status as a ship, the legal relationship of the chartering contract, obligation to exercise due diligence in making the vessel seaworthiness, subject of responsibility, and liability for damages and immunity are reviewed from the perspective of maritime law. In addition, in the degree four of MASS, the necessities of further research to clarify the attributable subjects and standards of responsibility in the event of a marine accident, as well as the necessities of institutional improvement such as technology development, enactment and amendment of law and funding are presented.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.45 no.3
• /
• pp.133-146
• /
• 2020

In the UK's the insurance law 2015, a remedy for breach of warranty in marine insurance was introduced. Also, if the insured proves that breach of warranty in marine insurance does not affect damages, the insurer pays the insurance money to the insured. The UK's marine insurance law has served as the governing law that has been the standard for the marine insurance industry for a long time. Korea and China were heavily influenced by the UK maritime insurance law. Therefore, this study analyzed the cases of breach of warranty in marine insurance in Korea and China. Through this, the insurer avoid the insurance contract for an accident that occurred after the breach of warranty. this result will be different under the new revised insurance law system. With the revision to The Insurance Act 2015, one of the biggest change in the insurance system is that it is possible to remedy of the violations of warranty. However, such a revision of the law requires considerable attention as it also changes the interpretation and judgment of the courts. Accordingly, a practical response of the insurance industry is required. It is necessary to prepare for possible disputes in practice.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.71
• /
• pp.171-194
• /
• 2016

In the UK, the legal principle for the duty of disclosure established in Carter v Boehm case was codified in the Marine Insurance Act 1906("MIA"). The duty of disclosure under the MIA is the pre-contractual duty by the insured and therefore, the insured should disclose the every material circumstance that would influence a prudent insurer's judgement. If the insured violates the duty of disclosure, the insurer is entitled to avoid the insurance contract, regardless of whether there was the deliberate or reckless breach, which is unfavorable to the insured. The Law Commission reviewed the duty of disclosure under the MIA in detail and provided the Insurance Act 2015 for the purpose of enhancing the interests of the insured. The Insurance Act 2015("Act"),while the basic legal structure of the duty of disclosure under the MIA still remains, amends it in respect of non-consumer insurance and furthermore, integrate the duty of disclosure and the duty not to misrepresent into the duty of fair presentation of risk. And according to the Act, the insurer is required to more actively communicate with the insured before entering the contract with the result that, if the insured fails to disclose the material circumstance but provides the sufficient information to put the insurer on notice, the insurer should further inquire for the purpose of the insured's revealing the material circumstance. In addition, the Act details the insured's constructive knowledge of material circumstance by reviewing the current case law and introduces a new system for the insurer's proportionate remedy against the insured's breach of the duty of fair presentation of risk.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Navigation
• /
• v.25 no.2
• /
• pp.137-148
• /
• 2001

This paper aims to select the appropriate risk management techniques on the risks of container transport at sea based on risk and risk management theory. Risk management can be defined as a systematic process for the identification and evaluation of pure loss exposure faced by an organization or individual, and for the selection and administration of the most appropriate techniques for treating such exposures. Risks of container at sea transport are widely divided into three categories, such as risk of container itself, risk of container cargo and liability to third party. This paper places emphasis on the risks of container transport at sea as well as limits its scope from container terminal to container terminal.