Research On The Legal System Of Contribution To General Average

Under the background of the international communication, which is becoming more andmore frequently, the sea transportation is also becoming more and more developed, thegeneral average, as the part of the international ocean shipping, has naturally become thefocus of people. The dispute of the general average, it is mainly about the scope of theapplicable rules and the main body of the general average contribution. And about the mainbody of the contribution to general average, although in theory by general average benefitedparty bear, that is to say refers to benefit from the ship, cargo party, but in the trial practice,also can appear some special contribution subject. In the foreign trial practice, the case of the“SEA DIAMOND” wheal make sure that when the general average is determined by other notexceptions behavior caused by circumstances, how to apportion the general average, namelyshould think about the cause of the general average, not just think that as long as happened ingeneral average, the benefited party should bear. And in the case of the “harp sea”, becausethe general average is due to the fault of the carrier, which is not the negligence liability,therefore, the carrier must bear the loss of general average, the case reflects the relationshipbetween the carrier negligence and general average. In the case of the “KEY TREASURELAKE”, because the carrier could not provide sufficient evidence, the court rejected thelitigation request, this case make sure that relationship between the evidence and the generalaverage. In order to better solve the contribution to general average in practice, I try to discussrelationship between the carrier negligence and the contribution to the general average in theform of the case analysis. As the same time, I will discuss the relationship between the cancelof the navigation and general average.This paper mainly divided into four parts, beside the preface and conclusion.The first part is introduce the cause of action, the case is about two shipping companiessued the china people’s insurance company for general average contribution.The second part explain the merits of the case of the case of this article which is selected.in this case, after the people’s insurance company of china provide the security, thetwo shipping companies release the good, then the two shipping companies announced thegeneral average, and required the insurance company to contribute the loss, at the same time,the insurance company rejected to bear the loss for the reason of the unseaworthy of carrier.The third part is to introduce the dispute of the case, mainly by analyzing the second partof the merits. In this paper, there are two disputes, the first one is, the insurance company as aguarantor, can become the main body of the contribution to general average; the second one is,when the carrier negligence has not been established, the carrier can ask for the other party tobear the general average. In this case, the two shipping company appealed to the people’sinsurance company of china, ask for contributing to the general average, when the twoshipping company putted forward the request, the people’s insurance company of china hadput forward that the two shipping company had make something wrong in order to against thecarrier, then raises the second dispute of this paper.The fourth part is the theory analysis, this part is very important,form the general theoryof general average, lead to the problem of the contribution of general average, pay moreattention to discuss the relationship between the carrier negligence and the contribution togeneral average, at the same time, I want to put the contribution of general average into threeparts, namely the establishment, sharing, recovery, then discuss one by one, in the same time,quote some other contributory case, discuss the problem the contribute the general average.Then discuss the relationship between the cancel of navigation and the statute of generalaverage.By analysis the previous theoretical in this paper and then lead to the conclusion, and inorder to better safeguard our country interests, we should make the true choice in the face ofthe debate about the nautical fault exemption.