Research On The Compensation Liability Of Non-spilling Ship Owners For Oil Pollution Caused By Ship Collision

There is a lot of controversy in theory and judicial practice about the liability of a oil-leaking ship caused by collision of ships at fault.In October 2019,“CMA CGM Florida” retrial judgment decided by the Supreme People’s Court triggered new discussions in academic circle.For disputes with foreign-related factors,the judgment adopted a new approach,focusing on the analysis of the application relationship between the Bunker Convention and domestic laws.Through the interpretation of Article 3,paragraph 1,of the Bunker Convention,it was concluded that the Convention only stipulates the liability of the owner of the oil-spilling vessel and does not involve the responsibility of the owner of the non-spilling vessel,and then through the relevant provisions of the domestic law to divide the responsibility of the oil-spilling vessel and the non-spilling.Through the analysis of the judgment and,this article refers to the thinking of the “CMA CGM Florida”retrial judgment,and takes the responsibility of non-spilling vessels with foreign-related factors as the research focus.Starting from the application relationship between the Convention and domestic law,this article focuses on the legal interpretation of Article 3 of the CLC1992 and the Bunker Convention.At the same time,after clarifying the application relationship between the convention and the domestic law,the article analyse the application of domestic in this issue.In the first chapter,this article describes the background,process and core content of the retrial judgment in the Supreme Court’s “CMA CGM Florida”,and selective analyse the judgment.In Chapter 2,about the application relationship between the convention and domestic law,this article creatively adopts “Loophole-filling Rule”—there are loopholes in the provisions of the Convention and “Conflict Rule”—the Convention and domestic law both deal with a certain issue that caused substantial conflicts.Using this rule can better understand the application relationship between the Convention and domestic law.In Chapter 3,in view of the current lack of in-depth research on the interpretation of Article 3 of the CLC1992 and the Bunker Convention,this article uses various convention interpretation methods such as literal interpretation,good faith interpretation,and purpose interpretation to draw a conclusion that the owner of the oil-spilling vessel is the person liable and the owner of the non-oil-spilling vessel is not directly responsible.The conclusion further consolidating the rationality of the principle of “who leaks oil,who pays”.In Chapter 4,about the analysis of domestic law,this article focuses on the application of Article 169 of Chinese Maritime Law and the application of the relevant provisions of Tort Liability Part of Chinese Civil Code.It denies the direct application of the relevant provisions of Article 169 of the Chinese Maritime Law and the Tort Liability Part of Chinese Civil Code on the issue of the liability of the owner of the oil spilled vessel,but Article 169 of Chinese Maritime Law can be regarded as legal basis,which permits oil-spilling vessel recovery for non-oil-spill vessels after compensation.In Chapter 5,the focus is on suggestions for perfecting the responsibility system for ship oil-spill caused by ships collision.It is advocated that Chinese Maritime Law directly stipulates that the oil responsibility of oil-spilling caused by the collision of ships at fault,that is the owner of the oil-spilling ship shall bear full responsibility to the victim,and the owner of non-oil-spilling ship shall not directly bear the responsibility,and the owner of oil-spilled ship can recovery for the owner of non-oil-spilling vessel in accordance with the proportion of faults in the collision.Considering the current limit of liability for compensation,especially the low limit of liability for fuel pollution,it is proper to increase the limit of liability.At the same time,it is considered that the current“Administrative Measures for the Collection of the Oil Pollution Compensation Fund for Ships” may not be conducive to the owner of the oil-spilling vessel to take all oil pollution responsibility firstly.It is advocated to increase the fund compensation limit and establish a fund advanced compensation system to strengthen the compensation guarantee for oil-spilling accidents.