- A.transfer all necessary documents to the third party
- B.assist the Insurer in pursuing recovery against the third party
- C.obtain prior agreement of the third party in determining the liabilities and expenses in respect of the insured vessel
- D.ask the third party to accept abandonment
- A.the Insurer
- B.the Insured
- C.any party other than the Insurer and the Insured
- D.either the Insurer or the Insured
- A.“giving up the hope to rescue the insured ship”
- B.“leaving the sinking ship”
- C.“discharging the Insurer's liability for the insured ship”
- D.“giving the ownership of the insured vessel to the Insurer”
- A.The inability of the yacht skipper to use radar effectively
- B.Acceptance by the master of the container ship of a small passing distance
- C.Over-confidence in the accuracy of ARPA by the master of the container ship
- D.lack guidance to assist in determining a safe speed in restricted visibility
- A.P&O Nedlloyd Vespucci
- B.Wahkuna
- C.both P&O Nedlloyd Vespucci and Wahkuna
- D.neither P&O Nedlloyd Vespucci nor Wahkuna
- A.was efficient
- B.was poor
- C.was too strict comparing with other ships
- D.could not be determined if efficient or poor
- 8
-
材料:
- At 1100 UTC on 28 May 2003,the container vessel P&O Nedlloyd Vespucci and the yacht Wahkuna collided in the English Channel in poor visibility.
- Each vessel had detected the other by radar when at a range of about 6 miles.The container ship was on a course of 255°(T)at a speed of 25 knots.The yacht was on the port bow of the container ship on a course of 012°(C)at a speed of 7.5 knots,and was due
- In the situation referred to in this massage,the speed of P&O Nedlloyd Vespucci ________.
- A.was too fast
- B.was too slow
- C.was a safe one
- D.could not be determined if safe or not
- A.the shipper
- B.the supplier of containers
- C.the cargo interests
- D.the carrier
- A.the carrier will not be responsible for the damage to a cargo contained in a container supplied by the carrier
- B.the carrier will in no way be responsible for the damage to a cargo contained in a container supplied by the shipper
- C.the carrier will be estopped from proving the insufficiency of packing of the GOODs within the container stuffed and sealed by the shipper even he has issued a clean bill of lading
- D.by the principle of estoppel,the carrier will not be held responsible even the cargoes,such as antiques,furniture,porcelain and crystal,had been shipped in one container
- A.by the cargo interests against the carrier
- B.by the carrier against the owners
- C.by the shipper against cargo interests
- D.by the carrier against the cargo interests
- A.precluded from recovery of any loss or damage from any interests
- B.prevented from making a denial that the cargo was packed in apparently GOOD order and condition
- C.entitled to make any allegation that contradicts what he has previously stated that the cargo was properly packed
- D.estopped from proving the sufficiency of packing of the GOODs
- A.did not know that the pilot ladder was improperly rigged
- B.knew that the pilot ladder was not rigged properly but still climbed on it
- C.did not believe that the pilot ladder was not rigged properly
- D.did not see the unstable movement of the vessel when he climbed on the pilot ladder
- A.the pilot
- B.the vessel
- C.the pilot boat
- D.the officers onboard the vessel
- A.the vessel has deep draughts
- B.the vessel has large freeboard even fully loaded
- C.the vessel is in ballast
- D.the vessel is fully loaded
- A.The carrier is not in a position to prove the loss or damage is substantially caused by one or more of the excepted perils
- B.It can not be decided that whether the carrier has to prove the loss or damage is substantially caused by one or more of the excepted perils because there are some differences between the decisions and authors and requirements of Hague and Hague/Visby R
- C.The carrier does not have to prove the loss or damage is substantially caused by one or more of the excepted perils due to the fact that there are some differences between the decisions and authors and requirements of Hague and Hague/Visby Rules
- D.The carrier must truly prove the loss or damage is substantially caused by one or more of the excepted perils even there are some differences between the decisions and authors and requirements of Hague and Hague/Visby Rules
- 17
-
材料:
- At around 0545 hrs the Cutter PILOT-5 approached the Vessel.The cutter's skipper drew the pilot's attention to the fact that the pilot ladder was hanging free in the air and did not stick to the ship's side surface and he suggested to transfer
- Half the propeller was emerged from the water.The pilot called the vessel and ordered to stop her engine.Because the gangway was already extended,the skipper decided to approach the vessel from the bow. The 2nd Officer was sta
- A.pilot ladder only
- B.gangway only
- C.pilot ladder in combination with the gangway
- D.neither pilot ladder nor the gangway
- A.not only the loss or damage was caused by one of the excepted perils,but also that the harm did not result from any negligence on the his part
- B.the loss or damage was caused by one of the excepted perils
- C.the harm did not result from any negligence on his part
- D.there are conjectures and speculation
- A.it is proved that he has privity to the loss or damage
- B.it is proved that the fault or neglect on his part is not the true cause of the loss or damage
- C.it is too onerous for him to demonstrate that the loss or damage is caused by what is beyond his control
- D.if there are conjectures and speculation
- 20
-
In accordance with old decisions,the carrier will not be excused unless he has proved that _______.
- A.not only the loss or damage was caused by one of the excepted perils,but also that the harm did not result from any negligence on the his part
- B.the loss or damage was caused by one of the excepted perils
- C.the harm did not result from any negligence on his part
- D.there are conjectures and speculation
- A.$2.0 millions
- B.$1.8 millions
- C.$1.6 millions
- D.$1.4 millions
- A.$0.9 million
- B.$0.8 million
- C.$1.0 million
- D.$2.0 millions
- A.$2.0 millions
- B.$1.8 millions
- C.$1.6 millions
- D.$1.4 millions
- A.The stated value of the vessel is always higher than its ensured value
- B.The sound value of the vessel at the time of the occurrence is always higher than its ensured value
- C.The sound value of the vessel at the time of the occurrence is always higher than its stated value
- D.The sound value of the vessel at the time of the occurrence is always higher than its saved value
- A.supports
- B.does not support
- C.has not indicated whether he supports or not
- D.has no interest in discussing
- A.does not transfer the responsibility for paying for loading,stowing and discharging to the shipper or consignee
- B.has nothing to do with the responsibility of the carrier
- C.relieves or lessens the carrier's obligations otherwise than as permitted by the Act
- D.imposes more obligations to the carrier than as permitted by the Act
- A.the carrier may validly delegate its responsibility for discharging the cargo to another party
- B.whether the carrier may validly delegate its responsibility for discharging the cargo to another party is still in dispute
- C.it is not necessary to consider whether the carrier may validly delegate its responsibility for discharging the cargo to another party
- D.the carrier may mot validly delegate its responsibility for discharging the cargo to another party
- 28
-
材料:
- As with the duties of loading and stowing of the carrier under Hague Rules and national statutes incorporating one or other of those Rules,there is a difference of opinion as to whether the carrier may validly delegate its responsibility for discharging t
- In consequence,while it may be permissible to transfer the responsibility for paying for loading,stowing and discharging to the shipper or consignee(e.g.by inserting an“FIOST”clause in the bill of lading),this or any other clauses which purport to also tr
- According to this passage,“FIOST”clause in the bill of lading is ______.
- A.not accepted by courts
- B.acceptable in courts
- C.a non-delegable clause in the bill of lading
- D.incorporated in the bill of lading to avoid superior bargaining by the carrier against the receiver
- A.port side before mid section
- B.port side after mid section
- C.starboard side before mid section
- D.starboard side after mid section
- 30
-
A conclusion can be drawn from this passage that SEA EMPRESS was grounded at about ______ hours(LT).
- A.0200
- B.0900
- C.1900
- D.2200
- After the bows had passed the Middle Channel Rocks Light to starboard there was a shuddering vibration,then a sound from the deck below of liquid being forced under pressure,accompanied by a strong smell of oil.The helmsman reported that the vessel was no
- A.North
- B.East
- C.South
- D.West
- A.the front Leading Light appeared to move to the left of the rear Leading Light
- B.the rear Leading Light appeared to move to the right of the front Leading Light
- C.the front Leading Light appeared to move to the east of the rear Leading Light
- D.the rear Leading Light appeared to move to the east of the front Leading Light