本文關(guān)鍵詞： 損害賠償 歸責(zé)原則 責(zé)任主體 責(zé)任保險(xiǎn) 基金制度　出處：《西南政法大學(xué)》2011年碩士論文　論文類(lèi)型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：我國(guó)是一個(gè)擁有廣闊海域的國(guó)家,近年來(lái)經(jīng)濟(jì)的發(fā)展,使我國(guó)對(duì)石油的需求越來(lái)越大。據(jù)有關(guān)數(shù)據(jù)表明,截止2010年12月我國(guó)原油的進(jìn)口量,較去年同期增長(zhǎng)了17.5%。1同時(shí),我國(guó)石油的進(jìn)口百分之九十是依靠船舶運(yùn)輸。大量石油的進(jìn)口,不可避免的給我國(guó)帶來(lái)了海上石油污染的威脅。然而現(xiàn)行立法沒(méi)有專(zhuān)門(mén)船舶油污損害賠償方面的民事責(zé)任立法,其中的一些相關(guān)規(guī)定也都散見(jiàn)在不同法律法規(guī)中,比如《民法通則》,《環(huán)境保護(hù)法》,《防污條例》等等。面對(duì)這些問(wèn)題,我國(guó)非常有必要建立起自己的船舶油污損害賠償制度。 美國(guó)《1990年油污法》應(yīng)該是一個(gè)成功的范例,它在油污防治以及賠償?shù)母鱾�(gè)方面都規(guī)定得十分完善。雖然它是美國(guó)國(guó)內(nèi)法,但是我國(guó)同樣可以借鑒其制度優(yōu)勢(shì)之處應(yīng)用于我國(guó)制度之建設(shè)。本文試從美國(guó)《1990年油污法》與中國(guó)油污損害賠償相關(guān)規(guī)定的比較入手,分析比較兩國(guó)規(guī)定的不同,再輔以國(guó)際法規(guī)則的經(jīng)驗(yàn)借鑒,旨在對(duì)我國(guó)船舶油污損害賠償制度的建設(shè)提供一些有益的參考。本文一共分為五個(gè)部分。 第一部分主要介紹了中美兩國(guó)現(xiàn)有船舶油污損害賠償制度,指出美國(guó)最重要治理油污的法律是OPA1990。該法律與美國(guó)自19世紀(jì)以來(lái)制定的一系列油污規(guī)則共同治理著美國(guó)海上船舶油污污染。同時(shí)通過(guò)對(duì)中國(guó)油污規(guī)則的背景介紹,說(shuō)明中國(guó)現(xiàn)階段在這一領(lǐng)域大體還是實(shí)行雙軌制。 第二部分是歸責(zé)原則和免責(zé)條件的問(wèn)題。首先論述現(xiàn)階段各國(guó)普遍適用的船舶油污歸責(zé)原則,指出該原則背離了傳統(tǒng)的船舶油污歸責(zé)原則—船東保護(hù)主義。然后通過(guò)兩國(guó)相關(guān)規(guī)定的比較,分析,指出雖然兩國(guó)都是適用嚴(yán)格的歸責(zé)原則,但是該原則在兩國(guó)的嚴(yán)格程度并不相同,美國(guó)歸責(zé)原則的嚴(yán)格程度要重于我國(guó)。而這種程度的差異正是通過(guò)免責(zé)條件的不同反映出來(lái)的。 第三部分主要論述的是責(zé)任主體、保險(xiǎn)和直接訴訟問(wèn)題。同樣通過(guò)比較分析,我們可以得出這樣的結(jié)論:就責(zé)任主體而言,美國(guó)所規(guī)定的責(zé)任主體范圍最大,國(guó)際條約次之,而我國(guó)國(guó)內(nèi)的相關(guān)規(guī)定不夠明晰,缺乏現(xiàn)實(shí)操作性;責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)和直接訴訟制度在兩國(guó)都有規(guī)定,只是在細(xì)節(jié)上有一些不同之處,但這些細(xì)節(jié)的不同會(huì)引起截然不同的后果,這同樣值得我們思考。 第四部分是關(guān)于基金制度的問(wèn)題。通過(guò)對(duì)基金制度的研究,對(duì)國(guó)內(nèi)和涉外兩個(gè)層面的情況進(jìn)行總結(jié)。我國(guó)現(xiàn)階段在涉外基金制度方面依舊是空白狀態(tài),同時(shí),與美國(guó)信托基金相比,我國(guó)國(guó)內(nèi)基金制度在基金來(lái)源,機(jī)構(gòu)組織等方面多有不足,進(jìn)而指出我們應(yīng)該學(xué)習(xí)美國(guó)信托基金中重視對(duì)溢油威脅事故應(yīng)急反應(yīng)的立法宗旨。 第五部分主要論述我國(guó)船舶油污損害賠償制度的完善。通過(guò)前面幾部分的研究,筆者總結(jié)出現(xiàn)階段完善我國(guó)船舶油污制度要從術(shù)語(yǔ)的規(guī)范、更加嚴(yán)苛的免責(zé)條件、責(zé)任主體和直接訴訟制度的完善等方面入手,同時(shí)還應(yīng)建立起本國(guó)國(guó)內(nèi)層面的基金制度。筆者就國(guó)內(nèi)基金制度提出了自己一些看法,例如經(jīng)過(guò)長(zhǎng)期發(fā)展以后基金的性質(zhì)應(yīng)該定義為信托基金,需對(duì)《船舶油污損害賠償基金征收和使用管理辦法》中的一些規(guī)定進(jìn)行修正等。
[Abstract]:China is a country with a vast area of the country, economic development in recent years, China's demand for oil is increasing. According to the relevant data show that as of December 2010, China's crude oil import volume, compared with the same period last year increased by 17.5%.1 at the same time, China's oil imports of ninety percent is to rely on a lot of oil shipping. Import, inevitably bring to our country the threat of oil pollution. However, the existing legislation does not have specific legislation on civil liability for oil pollution damage compensation, and some of the relevant provisions are scattered in different laws and regulations, such as the "general principles of civil law > > < < Law of environmental protection, and so on. In the face of these Regulations on anti fouling the problem that our country is very necessary to establish the system of compensation for oil pollution damage from ships of their own.
The United States <1990 oil law "should be a successful example, it in oil pollution prevention and compensation are all quite perfect. Although it is the domestic law of the United States, but China can also learn from the advantages of this system for the building of our system. This paper tries to compare with the relevant provisions of compensation from the United States <1990 oil pollution damage and Chinese law, analysis and comparison of the different provisions of the two countries, then the rules with experience of international law, aimed at building a system of compensation for oil pollution damage in China provide some useful reference. This paper is divided into five parts.
The first part mainly introduces the existing system of compensation for ship oil pollution damage Sino US, pointed out that the most important controlling oil law is a series of rules of the oil OPA1990. law and the United States since nineteenth Century to develop a common management of marine oil pollution pollution in the United States. At the same time through the China oil rule of background, that Chinese at this stage in this field is still of double track system.
The second part is the liability principle and the exemption conditions. Firstly, oil pollution generally applicable at this stage the imputation principle, the principle that deviates from the traditional imputation principle of ship pollution - the owner of protectionism. Then through the comparison between relevant provisions, analysis, pointed out that although the two countries are applicable imputation principle strictly, but the principle of the strict between the two countries is not the same, the strict degree of imputation principle to in our country. And the differences of the degree is through the exemption conditions of different reflected.
The third part mainly discusses the subject of liability, insurance and direct action. Also through the comparative analysis, we can conclude that it is the responsibility of the subject, the scope of the main responsibility of the United States by the provisions of the international treaty, the second, while the related regulations in our country will not clear, lack of practical operability; liability insurance and the direct lawsuit system in the two countries have provided, but the details have some differences, but these details will be quite different from the different consequences, which is worth our consideration.
The fourth part is about the problem of fund. Through the research on the fund system, the two domestic and foreign aspects of the summary. At the present stage of our country in the foreign fund system is still blank, at the same time, compared with the United States Trust Fund, China fund system in terms of source of funds, organization etc. many deficiencies, and pointed out that we should learn from the United States Trust Fund attaches importance to the legislative purpose of emergency response of oil spill accident threat.
The fifth part mainly discusses the improvement of the system of compensation for oil pollution damage in China. Through the above research, the author summed up the stage of perfecting the system of ship oil pollution from the terminology standard, exemption conditions more stringent, perfect aspects and the main responsibility system of direct action to start, should also establish our own domestic level the fund system. The domestic fund system put forward their own views, for example, after a prolonged development fund should be defined as the trust fund for "ship oil pollution compensation fund levy and the amendment by some of the provisions of the measures on the administration of.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D922.68;D971.2

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 阿拉騰敖其爾;我國(guó)船舶油污損害賠償索賠機(jī)制研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2012年

2 吳玲嫣;船舶油污的損害賠償法律制度研究[D];華東政法大學(xué);2012年

，

本文編號(hào)：1506864