• 한국항해항만학회지
• /
• 제26권1호
• /
• pp.66-77
• /
• 2002

Generally hull insurance is undertaken by mean of a contract of hull insurance. A contract of hul1 insurance here is a contract whereby the insurer undertakes to indemnify the assured against the loss and damage to the vessel mused by maritime perils. A contract of hull insurance is consists of printed main insurance clauses and a clause includes many sub-clauses. Now the Institute Time Clauses-Hulls (hereunder refer to as "English hull insurance clauses"made by the Institute of London Underwriters is much used as the standard from or basic from by many countries ail over the world Now Korean insurance companies hue not made our their own hull insurance clauses, they have just adopted the made-out English hull insurance clauses and the english law and practice to solve the problem related to marine insurance. On the other hand, the United States of America and Japan have made out their own hull insurance clauses based on English hull insurance clauses and used the clauses for many years. Now American is using American Institute Hull Clauses(hereunder refer to as "American hul1 insurance clauses"as its own clauses which was made out by American Institute of Marine Underwriters in 1977 and Japan is also wing its own clauses named Japanese Hull Standard Clauses(hereunder refer to as "Japanese hull clauses") which was made out by japanese Hull Insurance Association in 1990. Therefore the purpose of this study is not only to make a comparative study on English hull insurance clauses 1995, American hull insurance clauses 1977 and Japanese hull clauses l990, but also to supply on some legal materials necessary for Korea to establish and perform our own hull insurance clauses.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제43권
• /
• pp.239-273
• /
• 2009

Marine insurance contracts, which intended to provide indemnity against marine risks upon the payment of a premium, originated in Northern Italy in the late 12th and early 13th centuries. The law and practice of Italian merchants were later introduced into England through Lombard merchants. It is, therefore, quite exact that English and Continental marine insurance law have common root. Nevertheless, some significant divergences between English and Continental marine insurance systems occurred since the late 17th century, mainly due to different approaches adopted by English courts. The rule of warranty in English marine insurance was established in the second part of the 18th century by Lord Mansfield, who laid the foundations of the modern English law of marine insurance and developed different approaches, especially in the field of warranty in marine insurance law. Since the age of Lord Mansfield, English marine insurance law has developed a unique rule on warranty. Bearing in mind the realities of the 18th century, it could easily be understood why Lord Mansfield afforded such a strict legal character to marine warranties. At that time, the 'promise' given by the assured, played an important role for the insurer to assess the scope of the risk. Legal environments, however, have changed dramatically since the times of Lord Mansfield. Of course, it is still important that the assured keep his promises to the insurer under the insurance contract, which is based upon utmost good faith. Nevertheless, the remedy of automatic discharge from liability, regardless of existence of a casual link between the breach and loss seems harsh in the realities of the 21st century. After examining the warranty regime adopted by the German and Norwegian hull clauses, it is fair to say that they provide a more equitable approaches for the assured than does English law. Therefore, this article suggests that English warranty regime needs overall reform and it is time to reform.