• Journal of the Korean Institute of Navigation
• /
• v.18 no.2
• /
• pp.129-149
• /
• 1994

Sea casualties may happen in ship, cargo and the others concerned with sea transportation. : the shipo-wer, marine insurer and salvage company have been endeavored to compensate salvage award with some rule and regulation such as Marine Insurance Act, York Antwerp Rules and Average adjustment rules. Once sea casualties happened, the salvage contract is established between the owners, marine insurance and salvage company, the contract are divided into so many kinds of them. In this paper, we have an analysis on the character of the salvage contract whether the characteristic contents of them are in benefit to any party or not. In this connection with these positive or negative character of the contract, it is worthwhile to compare the actual salvage expenses contract with no cure no pay contract. LOF 1990 has been revised recently, which is based on no cure no pay, expecially, the special compensation, safety net clause of LOF 1990 could be understood in the view of the prevention of sea pollution and the preservation of sea circumstances in the world. Salvage has the complicated and quality, because the adjustment of almost salvage charges have been treated through the other sea casualties which is accompanied by and mixed with. Besides of the importance of salvage contracts, we are in need to understand that what the diversified character of salvage charges are. Furthermore the owners should carefully select the insured conditions on Hull Insurance according to the type of his company, operating ocean route, loading cargo and etc. In this paper, we would try to analyze the character of the salvage award such as General Average, Sue and Labour Charges and Particular charges. We would like to propose that the uniformed system of the salvage award. Compensation should be built up for the effective and efficient salvage operation and for reducing the claims and conflicts from the concerned parties. To this end, we could expect that the uniformed system for salvage award compensation will come to be the benefit of all owners, insurers, salvage company.

• Journal of Legislation Research
• /
• no.53
• /
• pp.491-524
• /
• 2017

Under the general maritime law, a life salvor has no claim against the person saved, and a pure life salvor has no right to compensation from the owner of the ship or its cargo. This harsh rule, which treats the salvor of life less generously than the salvor of property, has been modified by international conventions, statutes, so that life salvors may expect a reward in most cases. It is, especially, unreasonable that a prerequisite of a salvage award is that at least some of the property must be saved, because life of a person can not be compared to values of goods such as vessels and cargoes. Also it is not understandable that only pure life salvors can not expect a reward for the saving of life from the owners of the property. In the meantime, according to Article 39 of the Korean Maritime Search and Rescue Act (hereunder, KMSARA), any person who has gave assistance and rescued in accordance with a governmental officer's order may get a compensation for their time and labour. The above mentioned compensation which is stemmed from the KMSARA may play a role as a compliment for the lack of enough compensation to a life salvor. This means that even though a life salvor failed to save property, he may expect a minimum compensation from the KMSARA. However, it should be recognized that when a life salvor is entitled to both remuneration for the salvage of life and recourse of expenditures from the KMSARA, the total remuneration shall be paid only if and to the extent that such remuneration is greater than any reward recoverable by the salvor under the Korean Commercial Code and the KMSARA.