Lloyd's Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly
MARITIME SALVAGE UNDER CONTRACT: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF CHINESE LAW AND THE INTERNATIONAL SALVAGE CONVENTION
Liang Zhao*
Chinese maritime courts had entertained few maritime salvage disputes by the time the Chinese Maritime Code came into force in 1993. Judicial practice in Chinese courts has developed since then. Nanhai Rescue Bureau of the Ministry of Transport v Archangelos Investments ENE and Another is a recent and important case on maritime salvage under contract in China. This case has gone through five years of trials in the Guangzhou Maritime Court, the Guangdong High People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Court of China. This case raised the persistent issue of applicable law and the new issue of the assessment of the salvage payment in proportion under the Chinese maritime law of salvage. This article examines the issues in this case in relation to the International Convention on Salvage and the Chinese Maritime Code.
I. INTRODUCTION
The People’s Republic of China (hereafter “PRC”) promulgated the Chinese Maritime Code 1992 (hereafter “CMC 1992”) which came into force in 1993, and acceded to the International Convention on Salvage 1989 (hereafter “Salvage Convention 1989”) in 1993. The provisions for salvage at sea in CMC 1992 were drafted on the basis of the Salvage Convention 1989.1 Therefore, the relevant provisions in CMC 1992 are very similar to the provisions in the Salvage Convention 1989. Domestic salvage at sea in China is regulated by CMC 1992.2 Foreign-related salvage is governed by CMC 1992 and the Salvage Convention 1989 if the latter contains provisions differing from those contained in CMC 1992,3 unless the provisions are those on which China has announced reservations.4 In the recent case of Nanhai Rescue Bureau of the
* Assistant Professor, School of Law, City University of Hong Kong, Associate Director of the Hong Kong Centre for Maritime and Transportation Law. Visiting Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Maritime Law, Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore.
1. For the Chinese maritime law of salvage in general, see Yong-Shen Huang, “The Chinese maritime law of salvage” [1995] LMCLQ 269.
2. In this article, China means mainland China and Chinese law means the law of mainland China excluding the law of Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macau.
3. CMC 1992, Art.268, para.1.
4. China acceded to the Salvage Convention 1989 but reserved the right not to apply the Salvage Convention 1989: (a) when the salvage operations take place in inland waters and all vessels involved are of inland navigation; (b) when the salvage operations take place in inland waters and no vessel is involved; and (c) when the property involved is maritime cultural property of prehistoric, archaeological or historic interest and is situated on the sea-bed.
Maritime salvage under contract: a comparative study
287