• Journal of the Korean Society of Marine Environment & Safety
• /
• v.28 no.1
• /
• pp.64-71
• /
• 2022

The term "ordinary practice of seaman" is applied to hold the responsibility of those involved in marine accidents. However, there is a concern that the responsibilities of seamen may become unclear as the ordinary practices of the seamen are imposed. In addition, the responsibility for improvement is diluted by mentioning the ordinary practice of seaman when the navigation rules stipulated in the COLREGs is clearly violated. The maritime safety investigation and tribunal system thoroughly analyzes the causes of marine accidents to prevent the recurrence of similar accidents. As one cause that does not contribute to the prevention of the recurrence of similar accidents, it would be appropriate to exclude the term "ordinary practice of seaman" as far as possible. Accordingly, I reviewed the reason for the existence of the maritime safety investigation system and ways to improve the application of the term "ordinary practice of seaman," which is recognized as a customary and an unconventional navigation rule, by examining the theories on the ordinary practice of seaman and analyzing cases of court judgments and decisions in the Korea Maritime Safety Tribunal. I also proposed a modern interpretation on the responsibility for proper and purposeful application. In addition, from the viewpoint of preventing the recurrence of maritime accidents, it is suggested that the nounized term in Korea be replaced with the descriptive term.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Marine Environment & Safety
• /
• v.28 no.1
• /
• pp.54-63
• /
• 2022

The Marine Accident Investigation and Tribunal System is intended to provide a credible solution to prevent the recurrence of similar accidents. When a marine accident occurs, the Korea Maritime Safety Tribunal seeks to find its root causes through an analysis of what provoked the accident. It also contributes to the development of safety policies or practices by making a decision based on the findings. However, if the decision presented as the root cause of a marine accident is ambiguous or unclear, it may be difficult to achieve its intended goal. Hence, if we read some of the decisions of the Maritime Safety Tribunal, it is selective to directly apply the cause of an accident as a source of the measures that can prevent its recurrence. A typical example of this is the expression: "when a seafarer neglects ordinary practice of seaman." The term "ordinary practice of seaman" has been criticized for being used in some decisions like a master key where it is not easy to determine which specific rules or regulations were violated or blame the involved seafarers. Such term is present in Article 2 of the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea 1972. For the proper use of the term, this paper seeks to compare and establish the concepts of "ordinary practice of seaman" and the duty of care by providing a systematic interpretation of the original text. In addition, the duty of care was reviewed from the perspective of administrative, civil, and criminal laws. Furthermore, relevant legal precedents were reviewed and presented in the study. Accordingly, it is expected that the term "ordinary practice of seaman" would be properly used in decisions that contribute to the prevention of the recurrence of similar marine accidents.

• Proceedings of KOSOMES biannual meeting
• /
• 2018.06a
• /
• pp.56-56
• /
• 2018

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Navigation and Port Research Conference
• /
• 2022.11a
• /
• pp.82-83
• /
• 2022

국제해상충돌예방규칙(COLREGs)에 관한 협약은 해상에서 발생하는 충돌사고를 방지하기 위한 규칙으로 구성되어 있으며, Seaman(선원)의 Qualitative Rule(질적 규칙)과 Ordinary practice(통상적인 관행)에 기초하고 있다. MASS의 출현으로 인하여 질적 규칙과 관행으로 인하여 COLREG를 기반으로 한 항법 해석의 기준의 다름이 발생하였고, 기준의 차이로 인해 충돌 상황에 대한 항법 해석의 모호성문제가 발생하고 있다. 따라서 본 연구는 COLREG의 항법 해석의 모호성을 규명하여 유인과 무인 사이의 충돌회피 상황을 명확히 하는 것을 목적으로 한다. COLREG를 기반으로 한 충돌 상황의 모호성을 식별하기 위해 실제 항해사를 대상으로 충돌 회피 상황에 대한 인식을 조사하고, 정면 및 횡단, 횡단 및 추월 상황을 기반으로 조사 결과를 분석하였다. 분석 결과, 응답자들은 008°에서 마주치는 선박에 대해서 정면 또는 횡단 상황 항법 규칙을 적용해야 하는지, 160°에서 다가오는 선박에 대해서 추월 또는 횡단 상황을 적용해야 하는지에 대해 확신하지 못하는 것으로 나타났다. 이러한 결과는 이러한 모호성의 증가와 함께 충돌회피상황의 수동적 행동보다 능동적인 행동을 취함으로써 선원에 의한 충돌위험을 회피하려는 경향이 더 강해짐을 나타낸다.