Abstract

Limitation of liability of shipowner can based on property or can be personal - shipowner responds to certain part of the property (for example ship) or his entire assets to a certain amount. In the first case it is a real, and in the other the personal limitation of liability. On these principles all international instruments in this legal field have been developed. One of the well-known 'universal' principle of civil law says that the injurer must pay for a damage in full, in full extent and amount. However, when we are applying provisions of maritime law (as well as transport law in general) on the liability for damages and its compensation, the situation is quite opposite. Though, that the amount of suffered damages is coming closer to said universal principle of civil law has been confirmed by Amendments to the Protocol to the Convention on Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims 1996 (LLMC 1996). These Amendments increased amount of general (global) limitation of liability for maritime claims by 51% compared to the amounts in LLMC. Increased amounts are applicable from 8th June 2015. Regarding these amendments, a number of issues can be placed: justification for introducing the institute of limitation of liability in general; reasons why the injurer is privileged in maritime (and broader in transport), in the context of the amount of the obligation of compensation for damage; and whether the application of the institute undermine the principle that is enshrined in the legal system of every modern country, according to which the injured party has the right to just compensation. On the other hand, justice can be taken as well as an argument just to implement the limitation of liability system.

Highlights

  • Упр­кос чи­ње­ни­ци да са­ма Кон­вен­ци­ја на­во­ди да ће се у сва­ком кон­крет­ном слу­ча­ју на огра­ни­че­ње од­го­вор­но­сти при­ме­ни­ти би­ло ко­ји на­ци­о­нал­ни или ме­ђу­на­род­ни си­стем огра­ни­че­ња од­го­вор­но­сти пре­ма пра­ву ко­је се при­ме­њу­је у др­жа­ви стран­ци на чи­јем се под­руч­ју за­га­ђе­ње до­го­ди­ло, по­ве­ћа­ње из­но­са огра­ни­че­ња од­го­ вор­но­сти из LLMC 1996 имат ће од­мах не­по­сре­дан ути­цај на ви­си­ну оси­гу­ ра­ва­ју­ће по­кри­ћа, а ти­ме и на пре­ми­је оси­гу­ра­ња

  • Мо­же се за­кљу­чи­ти да све из­ме­не ко­је иду за нео­прав­да­но ви­со­ким гра­ни­ца­ма од­го­вор­но­сти, иа­ко су пред­у­зе­те у до­број на­ме­ри (за­шти­те оште­ ће­них), не­ма­ју увек нај­бо­љи ре­зул­тат и чак мо­гу би­ти на ште­ту оште­ће­них ако др­жа­ве не при­хва­те та­кве ме­ђу­на­род­не ин­стру­мен­те па они ни­ка­да не сту­пе на сна­гу, или сту­пе на сна­гу са­мо за узак круг др­жа­ва у ко­ји­ма ће се при­ме­њи­ва­ти

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Ре­пу­бли­ка Хр­ват­ска се од­лу­чи­ла за ре­ше­ње пре­ма ко­јем је бро­дар ко­ји же­ли огра­ни­чи­ти сво­ју од­го­вор­ност ду­жан осно­ва­ти фонд огра­ни­че­не од­го­вор­но­сти, па ако се бро­ дар по­зи­ва на огра­ни­че­ње од­го­вор­но­сти, а фонд огра­ни­че­не од­го­вор­но­сти ни­је осно­ван, од­го­ва­ра­ју­ће се при­мје­њу­ју од­ред­бе чла­на 397.

Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.