Search

Prilikom obavljanja plovidbenih djelatnosti na moru, osiguranje od odgovornosti podrazumijeva tri moguća izvora brodareve odgovornosti: ugovornu odgovornost, izvanugovornu odgovornost i obveze prema posadi broda. Brodar ne odgovara za čitavu štetu, nego samo do propisanih granica, uz uvjet da ne postoji razlog za gubitak prava na ograničenje. Veliku ulogu u osiguranju odgovornosti za štete iz sudara brodova imaju Institutske klauzule za osiguranje brodova, a kako one nisu pokrivale potpuno osiguranje odgovornosti za štete, brodari su se učlanjivali u P.&I. klubove. Propisivanje obveznog osiguranja od odgovornosti za neke vrste pravnih odnosa obično je praćeno i uvođenjem instituta izravne tužbe prema osiguratelju odgovornosti. U radu se razmatra značaj osiguranja odgovornosti brodara kod obavljanja plovidbenih djelatnosti. While performing sailing activities at sea, liability insurance implies three possible sources of shipowner's liability: contractual liability, extracontractual liability, and obligations to ship's crew. Shipowners are not responsible for the entire damage, but only to the prescribed limits, provided that there is no reason for loss of limitation. A major role in liability insurance for damage from ship collisions have Institute Hull Clauses, but as they did not cover full liability insurance, shipping companies joined the P.&I. clubs. The mandatory provision of liability for certain types of legal relations is usually typically accompanied by introduction of institute direct claims against the insurer of liability. The paper examines the importance of shipowner's liability insurance when carrying out sailing activities.

Prijevoz azbesta brodom je opasna djelatnost. Za štetu usljed bolesti člana posade u vezi s tim prijevozom odgovara brodar broda kojim je izvršen prijevoz i to prema principu objektivne odgovornosti., Carriage of asbestos by ship is a dangerous activity. The ship operator will be held liable to a crew member who contracts an illness in connection with that carriage. In such case the ship operator will be responsible for damages on the basis of strict liability.

(prikaz sudske presude od 3. svibnja 2001. s Visokog trgovačkog suda RH)

Kada su stranke ugovorile tzv. Paramount klauzulu, a potrebno je utvrditi granicu odgovornosti prijevoznika za gubitak tereta, vrijednost sto zlatnih funti sterlinga utvrđuje se prema engleskom Zakonu o kovanju novca iz 1870. i definira se kao 798.805 grama zlata finoće 916,66 što odgovara težini od 732, 238 grama čistoga zlata., When the parties contracted ''Paramount clause'' and it is required to fix the limit of carrier's liability in respect of loss of cargo, the gold value of 100 pounds sterling should be established according to the Coinage Act, 1870. The limitation sum of 100 pounds sterling (in gold value) is defined by the Coinage Act as being 798,805 grammes of gold of a millesimal fineness 916,66 which corresponds to 732,238 grammes of fine gold.

prikaz knjige

Za štetu koju je prouzročio član posade broda u radu ili u vezi s radom primjenjuju se propisi Zakona o obveznim odnosima. Prema tom zakonu za štetu odgovara brodar kao poslodavatelj člana posade ako ne dokaže da član posade nije postupio onako kako je trebalo., The provisions of the [Croatian] Law on Obligations apply to the damage caused by a crew member acting within the scope of his employment. According to this Law the ship operator shall be liable as employer of the crew member if he does not prove that the crew member has not acted as he should have done.

Hamburška pravila će stupiti na snagu 1. studenog 1992. za jedan ograničeni broj manjih država, ali se može očekivati da im ubrzo nakon toga pristupe i neke države s većim udjelom u svjetskoj trgovini. Pravila su napisana suvremenim jezikom i stilom i dobro se uklapaju u postojeće međunarodno trgovačko i transportno pravo. Novine koje Pravila donose prvenstveno se tiču odgovornosti brodara koja je u nekim aspektima proširena i pooštrena. U ovom se radu analiziraju neki argumenti izneseni u korist Pravila i protiv njih te se daje ocjena jednog dijela utjecaja koji će Pravila imati na transportno osiguranje i na hrvatske brodare. Prilog: Važnija literatura o Hamburškim pravilima (...), The Hamburg Rules will come into force on the 1st November 1992 for a limited number of smaller countries, and adherence of some countries having a larger share in the world trade can be expected soon. The Rules are drafted in a clear and modern language compatible with the existing transport and trade law. The changes brought in by the Hamburg Rules concern mainly the carrier's liability which has been extended in various aspects. In this paper some arguments raised in favour and against the Rules are analyzed and an evaluation is given of their impact on the transport insurance and the Croatian shipping lines. Appendix: A list of some important titles about Hamburg Rules

Brodar nije odgovoran za manjak tereta koji je primio u zapečaćenom kontejneru, ako je zapečaćen kontejner predao primatelju i u teretnici unio opasku ''said to contain'' i ako pošiljatelj ne dokaže da je predao brodaru onoliko tereta koliko je navedeno u teretnici. Okolnost da se teret nalazi u zapečaćenom kontejneru dovoljan je razlog da postoji razumna nemogućnost kontroliranja sadržaja i količine tereta. Skladištar kojemu je brodar predao teret dužan je postupati prema propisima Zakona o obveznim odnosima. Na temelju tih propisa sladištar je obvezan ostavitelju predati teret u stanju i količini kako ga je primio. Ostavitelj mora biti brodar od kojega je skladištar preuzeo teret, ako je njemu dispoziciju za preuzimanje i uskladištenje dala druga osoba. Pod ovom pretpostavkom ta je osoba ostavitelj. Ako se radi o kontejnerima, skladištar je u pogledu njihovog otvaranja dužan postupati prema dispoziciji ostavitelja. Ako je u dispoziciji navedeno da ostavitelj mora biti obaviješten o mjestu i vremenu otvaranja kontejnera, a skladištar tako ne postupi već pristupi otvaranju i pražnjenju kontejnera bez obavijesti ostavitelju, tada je skladištar odgovoran za eventualni manjak., The ship operator is not liable for a shortage of cargo he received in a sealed container if he delivers the sealed container to the consignee with the reservation ''said to contain'' included in the bill of lading, and if the consignor does not prove that he delivered to theship operator the quantity of cargo stated in the bill of lading. The fact that the cargo is in a sealed container makes the control of the quantity and contents reasonably impossible. The warehouseman to whom the ship operator delivered the cargo is under obligation to act in accordance with the Law on Obligations. This means that the warehouseman is obliged to deliver the cargo to the depositor in the same quantity and condition as he received it. If the shipping instruction for taking over and storing the cargo are given to the warehouseman by a person other than the ship operator, that person is deemed to be the depositor. As regards the unsealing of the containers, the warehouseman is under obligation to act in accordance with the depositor's instructions. If it is provided that the depositor must be informed of the place and time of opening the container, and the warehouse keeper does not proceed to the opening and discharge of the container without notice to the holder, then the warehouse keeper is liable for a possible shortage.

Za naknadu štete člana posade primjenjuje se Zakon o pomorskoj i unutrašnjoj plovidbi, bez obzira što njegove odredbe nisu u skladu s općim propisima o odgovornosti poslodavca za tjelesne povrede svojih radnika - kada član posade, na temelju zakona, mora raditi i prekovremeno, on ne može utvrditi da je za posljedice povrede, koja je nastala u vrijeme prekovremenog rada, kriv brodar. Kvar stroja koji može ugroziti sigurnost broda tako da dođe do brodoloma, ne predstavlja sam brodolom. Član posade mora biti u takvoj tjelesnoj i psihičkoj kondiciji da može, kada je to dužan, izdržati napore prekovremenoga rada., The provisions of the Maritime and Inland Navigation Law relate to damage for injury of a crew member although these provisions are not completely in accordance with the general provisions on liability of an employer for the injury of his employees. If the crew member is legally commited to over-time work he cannot claim damage from the operator for an injury which occured during such work only on the ground of the fact that he was injured during over-time work. A crew member must in such physical and psychological condition that he can endure over-time working.

Zakon o pomorskoj i unutrašnjoj plovidbi (ZPUP), koji je stupio na snagu 1.1.1978., noveliran je 1982., 1985., 1989. i 1990. godine. Bez obzira na broj novela osnovnog teksta zakona, može se zaključiti da se ipak radi o trajnijem, stabilnijem zakonskom tekstu jer je veći zahvat izvršen samo novelama iz 1985. godine. Ostale novele su nastale skoro isključivo u cilju nomotehničkog i drugog dotjerivanja teksta, promjena novčanih kazni i sl., iz poznatih razloga. U ovom se radu iznosi prijedlog izmjena i dopuna ZPUP u svrhu usuglašavanja zakona s ostalim novodonešenim saveznim zakonima, s preuzetim međunarodnim obvezama nastalim poslije ratifikacije nekih pomorsko-brodarskih konvencija, otklanjanja uočenih nedostataka i praznina zakonskog teksta, osobito u dijelu koji se odnosi na uređivanje temelja sigurnosti plovidbe, zaštite morskog okoliša, odgovornosti pomorskih i riječnih brodara, itd. Kako se očekuje ratifikacija Haško-Visbyjskih pravila od strane SFRJ - to je također iznijet prijedlog o novom temelju ograničenja brodarove odgovornosti., Maritime and Inland Navigation Law (came into force 1 January 1978) was revised by the 1982, 1985, 1989 and 1990 amendments. In spite of the number of amendments to the main text, it could be stated that it still represents lasting and stable legislation since the essential modification was made by the 1985 amendments. All other amendments resulted almost exclusively from the need for purely technical revision of the text, such as adjustment of penalty levels, etc. The paper presents the proposals for amendments to the Law for the purpose of its adjustment to the other federal legislation, while taking into account the international obligations undertaken as a ersult of ratification of respective maritime conventions, elimination of deficiencies observed and gaps in the legal text, particularly in that part which relates to the principles of safety of navigation, maritime environmental protection and liability of maritime and inland waterway shipping companies, etc.

Brodar je odgovoran za sudar i potonuće drugog broda ako prilikom isplovljavanja broda iz luke nije uložio dužnu pažnju srednje sposobnog brodara da brod uredno opremi za plovidbu. Brod nije bio uredno opremljen za plovidbu ako nije imao dovoljan broj kvalificirane posade. Ovaj se brodar ne može povezivati na ograničenje odgovornosti ako je za nesposobnost broda za plovidbu osobno kriv. Osobna krivnja zapovjednika broda, vlasništvo zadruge, ne dolazi u obzir ako zapovjednik ne vrši u zadruzi neku funkciju važnu za sposobnost broda za plovidbu. U zadruzi, ako se radi o njenoj osobnoj krivnji, odgovaraju direktor zadruge i referent za obavljanje sigurnosnih uvjeta rada na brodu. Ako za potonuli brod u suvlasništvu, sve potrebne radnje u vezi s osnivanjem fonda ograničene odgovornosti obavi jedan od suvlasnika, koji u sporu ima ulogu jedinstvenog suparničara u odnosu na drugog suvlasnika, njegove radnje vrijede i za drugog suvlasnika koji nije uopće, ili na vrijeme, odnosno propisno obavio odnosne radnje u vezi s fondom ograničene odgovornosti., The operator is responsible for collision and sinking of the other ship if by sailing out of a port he has not used due diligence of an average operator to properly equip the ship for navigation. The ship has not been properly equipped for navigation if she has not been manned with a sufficient number of qualified crew members. The operator cannot invoke the limitation of his liability if he is personally liable for the ship's unseaworthiness. There is no personal fault or neglect of the master of the ship, owned by a cooperative, if the master does not perform a function in the cooperative decisive for the seaworthiness of the ship. If there is a personal fault or neglect of the cooperative, responsible persons are the manager and the official in charge of the safety of working conditions on board the ship. If for a coowner sunken ship all the necessary acts concerning the constitution of a limitation fund have been performed by one of the coowners who is a single co-litigant in the proceedings in relation to the other coowner, his acts are valid for the other coowner who did not at all or did not at the time or in due way perform these acts relating to the limitation fund.

Ako su agent ili njegov podagent izdali netočne i antidatirane teretnice, po nalogu brodara, oni za štetu koja je iz toga nastala ne odgovaraju. Nalog mora dati sam brodar ili osoba koja je ovlaštena da ga zastupa prema trećim osobama. U svim drugim slučajevima za tu štetu agent i podagent odgovaraju osobno, i njihove radnje ne obvezuju brodara, jer su te radnje krivična djela. Za ta djela, ako ne postoji nalog brodara ili njegovih navedenih zastupnika, brodar ne odgovara. Odgovornost postoji prema svim oštećenima uključivši brodara i treće osobe. Agenti i podagenti odgovaraju neposredno i solidarno, pa i u slučaju da je podagent ozdao navedene teretnice na nalog svoga agenta. Mora biti dokazana šteta, te uzročna veza između štete i izdavanja navedenih teretnica., If the agent or his subagent issued incorrect and antedated bills of lading, by the ship operator's order, they are not liable for the damage thus caused. The order must be provided by the ship operator or the person authorized to represent him against third parties. In all other cases, the agent and subagent are personally liable for this damage and their acts do not oblige the ship operator, because these acts are criminal offences. In the absence of a ship operator's or his mentioned agents' order, the ship operator is not liable for these acts. The liability exsists against all injured parties including ship operator and third parties. Agents and subagents are directly, jointly and severally liable, even if the subagent issued the said bills of lading by the order of his agent. The damage must be proved, as well as the causal connection between the damage and the issuance of the said bills of lading.

Ako je u teretnici navedena klauzula o primjeni prava (Paramount klauzula), prema kojoj će se primijeniti Haška pravila ako su ona prihvaćena od zemlje otpreme, a ako ta zemlja nije članica konvencije na temelju koje se ta pravila primjenjuju, primijenit će se zakonodavstvo zemlje odredišta. A ako se radi o sporu koji nije normiran navedenom Konvencijom, primijenit će se odgovarajuće zakonodavstvo. Ukoliko zemlje otpreme i odredišta nisu članice navedene Konvencije, sud će na temelju ugovorene klauzule primijeniti jugoslavensko pravo kao pravo zemlje brodara. Brodar odgovara za teret od preuzimanja pa do predaje u luci ugovorenog odredišta. Na ovu odgovornost ne utječe ni činjenica da se prevezeni teret uobičajeno iskrcava u drugoj luci odakle se, na teret i rizik brodara, prevozi kopnenim putom do ugovorene luke predaje tereta. Ako je brod priznao ovu okolnost, i preda teret u drugoj luci u kojoj se teret uobičajeno iskrcava, odgovara ne samo za izbor skladištara, nego i za njegov rad. Odgovoran je i za štetu nastalu zato što teret nije mogao biti smješten u zatvoreno skladište. Primatelj nije dužan znati da je teret stigao u odnosnu luku već ga je obvezan primiti u ugovorenoj luci odredišta. Na ovu okolnost ne utječe ni činjenica da je brodar u iskrcajnoj luci na temelju ''notify address'' obavijestio određenu osobu o dolasku broda. Ako je brodar nije pobrinuo da teret bude sigurno uskladišten u iskrcajnoj luci, radi se o njegovoj osobnoj gruboj nepažnji, te za štetu odgovara neograničeno., The bill of lading contains a clause on application of law (Paramount Clause), according to which the Hague Rules will apply if adopted in the country of shipment. In case that these Rules are not in force in the country of shipment, the law of the country of destination will apply. If it is a question of a dispute which is not regulated by the Convention containing Hague Rules, the corresponding law will apply. If the country of shipment and the country of destination are not parties to this Convention, the court will, by virtue of the contractual clause, apply Yugoslav law as the law of the ship operator's country. Ship operator is liable for the cargo from the time he has taken it over, till the delivery at the stipulated port of destination. This liability is not affected by the fact that the cargo is usually discharged at another port and is carried by land to the stipulated port of delivery on the ship operator's expense and risk. If the ship delivers the cargo at another port where the cargo is ordinarily discharged, he is liable not only for the election of a warehouseman but also for his work. He is also liable for the damage resulting from the fact that the cargo could not be placed in a covered storage. The consignee is only obliged to receive the cargo at the stipulated port of destination, without regard to the fact that the ship operator informed certain person (''notify address'') of the ship's arrival at the port of discharge. If the ship operator has not taken care of secure warehousing of the cargo at the port of discharge, it is a question of his personal gross negligence and he is without limits liable for the damage.

After a brief history of drafting and adoption of the UN Convention on the Carriage of Goods by Sea (1978), commonly known as the Hamburg Rules, the author outlines the main differences between the Hamburg Rules and the Hague Rules, and elaborates in detail the meaning and importance of some of the provisions of the Hamburg Rules and in particular of Art.4, 5, 6, 7 and 8. The article aims to assist evaluation of the changes that would result to the commercial community worldwide if the Hamburg Rules were substituted for the system of liability as structured by the Hague-Visby Rules. The author concludes with the statement that would be in general detrimental of the world to move towards the adoption of two different systems of liability concurrently. Nevertheless, he stresses also that once Hamburg Rules come into force, a quick departure from the Hagues Rules and the Hague-Visby Rules will be imminent., Autor u članku, nakon kratkog povijesnog pregleda nastanka Hamburških pravila, iznosi osnovne razlike između Hamburških pravila i Haških pravila. U nastavku članka analizira pojedine članke Hamburških pravila (npr. čl.4, 5, 6, 7) kojima se regulira odgovornost brodara, ističući novine koje Konvencija sadrži, ali također argumentirano ukazujući na to što to može značiti za brodare. Članak završava tvrdnjom da bi, općenito uzevši, bilo porazno ako bi se međunarodnopravno ustalila dva bitno različita pravna režima, a to znači režim Hamburških pravila u nekim državama, a režim Haških pravila u ostalim državama. Autor ističe da dosadašnje iskustvo pokazuje kako Hamburška pravila neće, i ako steknu dovoljan broj ratifikacija za stupanje na snagu, tako brzo u većoj mjeri zamijeniti pravni režim odgovornosti brodara utvrđen Haškim pravilima.

Brodar je odgovoran za pravilno slaganje tereta. Kod iskrcaja se najkasnije iskrcava oštećeni teret. Očevidni propust u cesiji ne čini samu cesiju nevaljanom. Prvostupanjski sud ne mora striktno postupiti po uputi drugostupanjskog suda ako iz provedenog dokaza jasno proizlazi, i bez provođenja uputa drugostupanjskog suda, da su relevantne činjenice nesporno dokazane., In this case the cargo was improperly loaded and stored on a ship and therefore a part of it was damaged during carriage. The ship operator is liable for improper loading of the cargo as well as for improper order of unloading of the cargo. Namely, during unloading the rotted and/or damaged cargo has been unloaded last. The cargo underwriters have indemnified the cargo receiver and on the basis of the written assignment claim to be reimbursed by the ship operator who objected because the order firm's name was stated in the assignment document. The Court rejected the objection with an explanation that it was only an obvious error scribendi. In this case one of the issues was also the question as to the cause of the damage and the Court of the second instance ordered an opinion from an expert for transport. The fact that the Court of the first instance did not appoint such a type of expert as indicated by the Court of the second instance does not render the decision null and void because the Court of the first instance is free not to follow fully the orders of the higher Court if all other evidence points to the conclusion that all material circumstances are properly established.

Paramount klauzulu, prema kojoj će se Međunarodna konvencija za izjednačenje nekih pravila o teretnici (Brisel, 1924. - Haška pravila) primijeniti onako kako su ozakonjena u zemlji zastave broda, treba tumačiti na način da su stranke iz ugovora o prijevozu ugovorile primjenu jugoslavenskog prava, kao prava zastave broda, i da će se visina ograničene odgovornosti brodara po jedinici tereta odrediti prema jugoslavenskom pravu - Čl.567 ZPUP-a. Novčani iznos ograničene odgovornosti brodara po jedinici tereta određuje se prema Odluci SIV-a o novčanim iznosima ograničenja brodarove odgovornosti koja je bila na snazi u vrijeme kada je teert predan ili trebao biti predan primatelju na odredištu. Primatelj tereta je dužan primiti od brodara i oštećeni teret (''pometačinu''), sve dok oštećeni teret ima prometnu vrijednost (arg. iz čl.572, st.3. ZPUP), Paramount clause, according to which the Hague Rules are applied legislated in the country of the flag of the ship, should be interpreted as if the parties to the contract of carriage had stipulated the application of Yugoslav law as the law of the flag of the ship and as if the operator's liability should have been limited on the basis of package or unit of cargo in accordance with Art.567 of the Yugoslav Maritime and Inland Navigation Law. The limitation sum of operator's liability should be established according to the amount at the time when the cargo should have been delivered in the port of delivery.