Efficient dispute resolution mechanisms in marine insurance contracts: Legal perspectives and emerging trends

• Autorzy: Abuelenin Ahmed Hany M.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.17402/629

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The marine insurance contract primarily aims at providing security for the performance of the commercial activity of transporting goods. This contract has a special nature that aims to indemnify the insured against losses to the marine adventure. Marine insurance contract disputes, like several other types of disputes, are determined by various resolution procedures, either in the courts or through alternative methods such as arbitration, negotiation, and mediation. This characteristic influences the choice of the substantive and procedural rules that will apply to resolve possible conflicts between the parties. If disputes do arise, peaceful and quick resolution is in the interest of everyone involved. Commercial parties usually insert in marine insurance contracts the choice of court and applicable law clauses that determine a timely resolution of disputes. The choice of dispute resolution method is therefore critical. In this paper, we discuss modern, quick, and effective resolutions to ensure that the disputes arising from a marine insurance contract are resolved at the lowest cost. We also analyze several cases.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

marine insurance contracts; dispute resolution mechanisms; alternative dispute resolution; ADR; maritime law; arbitration and mediation; legal frameworks

• Wydawca: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Politechniki Morskiej w Szczecinie
• Czasopismo: Zeszyty Naukowe Politechniki Morskiej w Szczecinie
• Rocznik: 2025
• Tom: nr 81 (153)
• Strony: 35--46
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 46 poz., rys., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Abuelenin Ahmed Hany M.

• King Abdulaziz University, Faculty of Maritime Studies Commercial and Maritime Law, Supply Chain Management and Maritime Business Department Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

• https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2759-9722

Bibliografia

• 1. Baatz, Y. (Ed.). (2020) Maritime Law (5th Edition). Informa Law from Routledge, doi: 10.4324/9781003046943.
• 2. Baker, T. (2020) Uncertainty & Risk: Lessons for Legal Thought from the Insurance Runoff Market. Boston College Law Review 62, 59, doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3532449.
• 3. Baker, T. & Logue, K.D. (2015) Mandatory rules and default rules in insurance contracts. In: Schwarcz, D. Siegelman, P. (Eds) Research Handbook on the Economics of Insurance Law, Chapter 11, pp. 377‒412, doi: 10.4337/ 9781782547143.00020.
• 4. Beresford, N. & Turnbull, J. (2020) Subrogation. In: Merkin, R. Goldrein, I. & Mance, J. (Eds) Insurance Disputes (3rd Edition), Chapter 9, pp. 233–267, doi: 10.4324/9781003122906-10.
• 5. Bundy, R.R. (2012) Dispute Resolution Mechanisms. In: Nordquist, M.H. (Ed.) Maritime Border Diplomacy, pp. 355–363, doi: 10.1163/9789004230941_022.
• 6. Consort Shipping Line Ltd v FAI Insurance (Fiji) Ltd. (1998) FJHC 205; Hbc0383.97s (29 October 1998), aff’d, FAI Insurance (Fiji) Ltd v Consort Shipping Line Ltd [1999] FJCA 10; Abu0075u.98s (11 February 1999). Retrieved from: https://www.paclii.org/libraries/maritime_law/casesummaries-marine-insurance/index.html.
• 7. Coyle, J.F. (2022) The Mystery of the Missing Choice-ofLaw Clause. 56 UC Davis Law Review 707 (2022), UNC Legal Studies Research Paper, doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3976508.
• 8. Curtis, S. Gaunt, I. & Cecil, W. (2020) The Law of Shipbuilding Contracts (5th Edition). Informa Law from Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429428166.
• 9. Dimitropoulos, G. (2021) International Commercial Courts in the ‘Modern Law of Nature’: Adjudicatory Unilateralism in Special Economic Zones. Journal of International Economic Law, 24 (2), pp. 361–379, doi: 10.1093/jiel/jgab017.
• 10. Dong, L. (2023) Why International Conciliation Can Resolve Maritime Disputes: A Study Based on the Jan Mayen Case. Sustainability 15 (3), 1830, doi: 10.3390/su15031830.
• 11. Dunt, J. (2024) To what extent should marine cargo insurance be construed to include cover for financial loss? In: Gürses, Ö. (Ed.) Research Handbook on Marine Insurance Law, Chapter 6, pp. 108–129, doi: 10.4337/ 9781803926681.00014.
• 12. Fu, B.-C. (2022) Unification and Coordination of Maritime Jurisdiction: Providing a Judicial Guarantee for International Trade and Marine Transport. Frontiers in Marine Science 9, 848942, doi: 10.3389/fmars.2022.848942.
• 13. Gaillard, E. (2023) Seven dirty tricks to disrupt an arbitration and the responses of international arbitration law. Arbitration International 39 (3), pp. 361–378, doi: 10.1093/ arbint/aiad037.
• 14. Gee, S. (2020) Jurisdiction and arbitration clauses. In: Rhidian, T. (Ed.) The Evolving Law and Practice of Voyage Charterparties, Chapter 2, pp. 35–52, doi: 10.4324/9781003122869-2.
• 15. Gürses, Ö. (2023) Marine Insurance Law (3rd Edition), Routledge, doi: 10.4324/9781003031895.
• 16. Gürses, Ö. & Hjalmarsson, J. (2020) Marine Insurance. In: Baatz, Y. (Ed.) Maritime Law (5th Edition), pp. 465–529, doi: 10.4324/9781003046943-11.
• 17. Hobbs, J. (2020) Insurance of Goods in Transit. In: Merkin, R. Goldrein, I. & Mance, J. (Eds) Insurance Disputes (3rd Edition), pp. 581–600, doi: 10.4324/9781003122906-22.
• 18. Jansen, L.J.M. Kalas, P.P. & Bicchieri, M. (2021) Improving governance of tenure in policy and practice: The case of Myanmar. Land Use Policy 100, 104906, doi: 10.1016/ j.landusepol.2020.104906.
• 19. Kamanga, P.N.S. (2021) The Power of an Arbitral Tribunal to Determine Its Own Jurisdiction in International Commercial Arbitration. Beijing Law Review 12 (02), pp. 379–391, doi: 10.4236/blr.2021.122021.
• 20. Kingdom of Tonga & Shipping Corporation of Polynesia Ltd v Allianz Australia Insurance Ltd. (2005) TOSC 8; CV 723 2003 (25 February 2005). Retrieved from: https://www. paclii.org/libraries/maritime_law/case-summaries-marineinsurance/index.html.
• 21. Klopott, M. (2022) The Importance of Insurance in Maritime Trade of Chilled or Frozen Cargoes. European Research Studies Journal XXV (3), pp. 470–482, doi: 10.35808/ ersj/3042.
• 22. Laho Ltd v QBE Insurance (Vanuatu) Ltd. (2001) VUSC 130; Civil Case 24 of 2000 (2 April 2001). Retrieved from: https://www.paclii.org/libraries/maritime_law/casesummaries-marine-insurance/index.html.
• 23. Lee, J.-H. & Pak, M.-S. (2020) Arbitrator Acceptability in International Maritime Arbitration. Journal of Korea Trade 24 (5), pp. 18–34, doi: 10.35611/jkt.2020.24.5.18.
• 24. Lee, J. & Seung-Lin, H. (2024) Article: Study of Marine Cargo Insurance under the Incoterms 2020 CIP Term. Global Trade and Customs Journal 19 (4), pp. 260–266, doi: 10.54648/gtcj2024022.
• 25. Lin, X. & Kwon, W.J. (2020) Application of parametric insurance in principle‐compliant and innovative ways. Risk Management and Insurance Review 23 (2), pp. 121–150, doi: 10.1111/rmir.12146.
• 26. Menkel-Meadow, C. (2018) Mediation. Routledge, doi: 10.4324/9781315204826.
• 27. Menon, S. (2021) Arbitration’s Blade: International Arbitration and the Rule of Law. Journal of International Arbitration 38 (1), pp. 1–26, doi: 10.54648/joia2021001.
• 28. Mukherjee, P.K. (2022) Salvage Agreement and Contract Salvage: Risk Dynamics in Salvage Law. In: Bal, A.B. Rajput, T. Argüello, G. & Langlet, D. (Eds) Regulation of Risk, pp. 551–572, doi: 10.1163/9789004518681_020.
• 29. Myburgh, P. (2024) Taxonomizing third-party rights of direct action against marine liability insurers. In: Gürses, Ö. (Ed.) Research Handbook on Marine Insurance Law, Chapter 10, pp. 204–222, doi: 10.4337/9781803926681.00019.
• 30. Nottage, L. (2021) Confidentiality versus transparency in international commercial arbitration and investor-state arbitration in Australia and Japan. In: International Commercial and Investor-State Arbitration, Chapter 8, pp. 236‒258, doi: 10.4337/9781800880825.00017.
• 31. Okudan, O. & Çevikbaş, M. (2022) Alternative Dispute Resolution Selection Framework to Settle Disputes in Public–Private Partnership Projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 148 (9), doi: 10.1061/(asce) co.1943-7862.0002351.
• 32. Pimco Shipping Pty Ltd v Moeder, Hermann and Moeher Trading Pty Ltd. (1987) PGNC 57; [1987] PNGLR 427 (23 December 1987). Retrieved from: https://www.paclii.org/ libraries/maritime_law/case-summaries-marine-insurance/ index.html.
• 33. Pu, S. & Lam, J.S.L. (2020) Blockchain adoptions in the maritime industry: a conceptual framework. Maritime Policy & Management 48 (6), pp. 777–794, doi: 10.1080/ 03088839.2020.1825855.
• 34. Ramanathan, K. (2021) Labour Arbitration and Commercial Arbitration: A Comparative Analysis. SSRN Electronic Journal, doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3881389.
• 35. Robles, A.C. (2023) The Defaulting State and Fact-Finding in the South China Sea Arbitration. In: The Defaulting State and the South China Sea Arbitration, Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore, pp. 189–325, doi: 10.1007/978-981-19-6394- 0_3.
• 36. Simanjuntak, M. & Widiarty, W.S. (2022) The Role of The Financial Services Authority (OJK) In Fostering And Supervising The Insurance Industry Associated With The Availability Of OJK Contributions In Indonesia’s Economic Development Construction. International Journal of Environmental, Sustainability, and Social Science 3 (1), pp. 72– 78, doi: 10.38142/ijesss.v3i1.160.
• 37. Singh, B. (2023) Unleashing Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in Resolving Complex Legal- Technical Issues Arising in Cyberspace Lensing E-Commerce and Intellectual Property: Proliferation of E-Commerce Digital Economy. Brazilian Journal of Alternative Dispute Resolution ‒ RBADR 5 (10), pp. 81‒105, doi: 10.52028/rbadr.v5i10. art04.ind.
• 38. Stebbings, E. Papathanasopoulou, E. Hooper, T. Austen, M.C. & Yan, X. (2020) The marine economy of the United Kingdom. Marine Policy 116, 103905, doi: 10.1016/j.marpol.2020.103905.
• 39. Sturley, M. (2024) Choice-of-law issues in marine insurance cases in the United States. In: Gürses, Ö. (Ed.) Research Handbook on Marine Insurance Law, Chapter 11, pp. 223–243, doi: 10.4337/9781803926681.00020.
• 40. Thirgood, R. (2004) International Arbitration: The Justice Business. Journal of International Arbitration 21 (4), pp. 341–354 doi: 10.54648/joia2004019.
• 41. Thomas, D.R. (Ed.) (2006) Marine Insurance: The Law in Transition (1st Edition). Informa Law from Routledge, doi: 10.4324/9781003122784.
• 42. Thomas, D.R. (Ed.) (2023) The Modern Law of Marine Insurance. Informa Law from Routledge, doi: 10.4324/9781003268703.
• 43. UK Parliament (1906) Marine Insurance Act 1906. Retrieved from: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Edw7/6/41.
• 44. Westpac Banking Corporation v Dominion Insurance Ltd. (1996) FJHC 148; Hbc0468j.94s (8 October 1996), aff’d, Dominion Insurance Ltd v Westpac Banking Corporation [1998] FJCA 48; Abu0005u.97s (27 November 1998). Retrieved from: https://www.paclii.org/libraries/maritime_ law/case-summaries-marine-insurance/index.html.
• 45. Xhelilaj, E. (2022) Legal instruments of the Law of the Sea related to the peaceful resolution of maritime disputes. Pomorstvo 36 (1), pp. 123–127, doi: 10.31217/p.36.1.14.
• 46. Zavos, C. (2006) The International Hull Clauses 2003. In: Thomas, D.R. (Ed.) Marine Insurance: The Law in Transition (1st Edition), pp. 161–166, Informa Law from Routledge, doi: 10.4324/9781003122784-7.

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu ze środków MNiSW, umowa nr POPUL/SP/0154/2024/02 w ramach programu "Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki II" - moduł: Popularyzacja nauki i promocja sportu (2025).