Research On The Liability Status Of The Shipowner Of The Non-oil Leaking Ship In The Case Of A Collision Between Two Ships At Faul

The collision of ships due to operational negligence has led to the frequent occurrence of oil pollution damage accidents at sea.The question of whether the owner of a non-oil spill vessel can be the subject of liability for oil pollution damage in the event of a collision in which the vessels are negligent with each other has been a matter of debate in maritime science and practice.With regard to China’s liability regime for oil pollution damage to ships,it has not established a specific regime at the domestic law level due to the complexity of the relevant laws.In 2019,the Supreme Court clarified in the Duffy Florida case,which is a typical case,that the owner of a non-spill vessel can be held directly liable as the subject of liability,which has led to extensive discussions,and the above controversy still exists.Therefore,based on the international conventions to which China is a party and the existing domestic legal framework,this article argues whether the owner of a non-oil spill vessel can be the subject of liability for oil pollution damage,and discusses the possible implications of the liability of the non-oil spill vessel party.The first chapter of this paper firstly introduces the controversial views inherent in the liability status of the non-spill vessel owner.Secondly,based on the introduction of many different court cases,the breakthrough of the "Duffy Florida" case on the liability of non-oil spill vessel owners was analysed,and the Supreme Court clarified that non-oil spill vessel owners could become the subject of liability and be directly liable to the injured party.Finally,it introduces the controversy about the application of the laws,one is the controversy of the application of treaties and domestic laws,the other is the controversy of maritime legislation and tort law under domestic laws,as well as the possible impact of the liability of non-spill vessel owners.The second chapter discusses the status of the liability subjects of non-oil spill ship owners under the two major oil pollution conventions separately,mainly by tracing the institutional arrangement of the liability subjects from the provisions of the conventions and the relevant legislative background.Under the framework of CLC Convention,the ship owner is the single responsible subject based on the responsibility guidance mechanism and sufficient responsibility sharing subjects,and it is inadvisable to outspread the range of the responsible subject.In contrast,the Bunker Convention has deleted the provisions of the liability guidance system and the liability-sharing main body has insufficient ability to pay,so the ship owner is no longer the only responsible body.The third chapter analyses the relevant domestic law liability system.Firstly,from the analysis of the relevant laws of special law maritime law,this part of the law is excluded;secondly,starting from the provisions on intervening third parties in environmental tort,it is determined that the non-oil spill vessel owner,as a third party,is liable under the principle of fault.The fourth chapter explores the possible impacts on the basis of establishing the liability of the non-spill vessel owner.It first explores whether the non-spill vessel owner enjoys a limitation of liability under the current legal framework and finally discusses whether the non-leaking party becoming the subject of liability will have an impact.The fifth chapter builds on the previous section by first analysing the specific liability scenarios for both parties to the ship.After concluding that the owner of a non-spill vessel should be held liable for oil pollution damage,suggestions are made to improve the situation with regard to the possible consequences of the liability of the owner of a non-spill vessel.In the context of the amendments to maritime law,suggestions are made for the owners of non-oil spill vessels at the level of substantive law and procedural law.