發(fā)文機關(guān)最高人民法院
發(fā)文日期2022年12月12日
時效性現(xiàn)行有效
施行日期2022年12月12日
前言
藍色而廣闊的海洋承載著人類長久的夢想。堅持陸海統(tǒng)籌，加快建設(shè)海洋強國，是實現(xiàn)中華民族偉大復(fù)興的重大戰(zhàn)略任務(wù)。海事審判依法保障海洋強國建設(shè)，在維護國家海洋權(quán)益、保護海洋生態(tài)環(huán)境、促進海洋經(jīng)濟高質(zhì)量發(fā)展方面肩負重要責(zé)任。
自海事法院設(shè)立以來，中國海事審判日益發(fā)展。我國已經(jīng)建成亞太海事司法中心，正向著建設(shè)國際海事司法中心的目標邁進。
2018年到2021年期間，全球貿(mào)易局勢復(fù)雜多變，世界航運經(jīng)濟波動加劇，世紀疫情影響深遠，百年未有之大變局加速演進。全國海事審判三級法院堅持以習(xí)近平新時代中國特色社會主義思想為指導(dǎo)，深入學(xué)習(xí)貫徹習(xí)近平法治思想，堅守初心、勇?lián)姑?，服?wù)和保障黨和國家工作大局，充分發(fā)揮海事審判職能作用，各方面工作取得新的進展，國際影響力進一步擴大。中國海事審判向著建設(shè)國際海事司法中心的目標，凝心聚力，砥礪前行，在藍天碧海之間書寫新的篇章。
一、 全國海事審判與執(zhí)行基本情況
（一）總體情況
2018年至2021年，全國海事審判三級法院受理各類海事海商、海事行政、海事刑事以及海事執(zhí)行案件132633件，審執(zhí)結(jié)133309件。
附表一：2018-2021年全國海事審判與執(zhí)行收案一覽表
附表二：2018-2021年全國海事審判與執(zhí)行結(jié)案一覽表
（二）各類海事案件概況
2018年至2021年，全國海事審判三級法院受理海事海商案件89384件，結(jié)案88764件（海商案件占比60.78%，海事訴訟特別程序案件占比16.7%，海事案件占比7.67%，其他海事海商案件占比14.85%）；受理海事行政案件4339件，結(jié)案4227件。海事法院試點受理海事刑事案件45件（不含指定管轄案件、請示案件），其中寧波海事法院41件，?？诤Ｊ路ㄔ?件。
附表三：2018—2021年全國海事案件類型分布圖
附表四：2018—2021年全國海事案件案由分布圖
（三）涉外涉港澳臺案件情況
2018年至2021年，全國海事審判三級法院共受理涉外案件10397件、涉港澳臺案件2693件；審結(jié)涉外案件10611件、涉港澳臺案件2782件。其中十一家海事法院一審新收涉外案件9226件、涉港澳臺案件1410件；審結(jié)涉外案件9437件、涉港澳臺案件1435件。案件涉及一百多個國家和地區(qū)。所涉國家數(shù)量排名前五的有巴哈馬、美國、新加坡、德國、丹麥。
（四）扣押、拍賣船舶情況
2018年至2021年，十一家海事法院扣押船舶2717艘，其中外籍船舶105艘，港澳臺籍船舶24艘。拍賣船舶1252艘，其中外籍船舶30艘，港澳臺籍船舶9艘。被扣押外籍船舶數(shù)量前五的船旗國依次為俄羅斯、巴拿馬、利比里亞、馬紹爾群島、越南。被拍賣外籍船舶數(shù)量前五的船旗國依次為利比里亞、巴拿馬、馬紹爾群島、伯利茲、新加坡。
（五）執(zhí)行情況
2018年至2021年，十一家海事法院受理海事執(zhí)行案件38795件，結(jié)案39897件。
附表五：2018—2021年全國海事執(zhí)行案件收結(jié)案對比一覽表
二、 充分發(fā)揮海事審判職能，助力建設(shè)海洋強國
建設(shè)海洋強國是實現(xiàn)中華民族偉大復(fù)興的重大戰(zhàn)略任務(wù)，是中國特色社會主義事業(yè)的重要組成部分。海事審判直接服務(wù)于外貿(mào)航運、海洋開發(fā)，事關(guān)國家司法主權(quán)、海洋權(quán)益，肩負著服務(wù)保障海洋強國建設(shè)的重要任務(wù)。全國海事審判三級法院主動服務(wù)和保障黨和國家工作大局，充分發(fā)揮海事審判職能作用，堅定維護國家海洋權(quán)益，有力促進海洋經(jīng)濟發(fā)展，大力推進海洋生態(tài)保護，為服務(wù)保障高水平對外開放和海洋強國建設(shè)做出積極貢獻，取得了令人矚目的優(yōu)異成績。
（一）堅持科學(xué)謀劃，服務(wù)保障國家戰(zhàn)略
為充分發(fā)揮海事審判服務(wù)保障國家重大戰(zhàn)略、推動構(gòu)建新發(fā)展格局的重要作用，最高人民法院圍繞服務(wù)保障高水平對外開放和加快建設(shè)海洋強國，深化頂層設(shè)計、鼓勵對接地方，自2018年至2021年，先后出臺《關(guān)于為海南全面深化改革開放提供司法服務(wù)和保障的意見》《關(guān)于為粵港澳大灣區(qū)建設(shè)提供司法服務(wù)和保障的意見》《關(guān)于人民法院進一步為“一帶一路”建設(shè)提供司法服務(wù)和保障的意見》《關(guān)于人民法院為中國（上海）自由貿(mào)易試驗區(qū)臨港新片區(qū)建設(shè)提供司法服務(wù)和保障的意見》《關(guān)于人民法院服務(wù)保障進一步擴大對外開放的指導(dǎo)意見》《關(guān)于支持和保障深圳建設(shè)中國特色社會主義先行示范區(qū)的意見》《關(guān)于人民法院為海南自由貿(mào)易港建設(shè)提供司法服務(wù)和保障的意見》《關(guān)于人民法院支持和保障浦東新區(qū)高水平改革開放打造社會主義現(xiàn)代化建設(shè)引領(lǐng)區(qū)的意見》等一系列司法文件，指導(dǎo)海事審判各級法院提高司法效能、創(chuàng)新審判機制、強化隊伍建設(shè)，充分發(fā)揮海事司法在維護國家海洋權(quán)益、保護海洋生態(tài)環(huán)境、推動海洋經(jīng)濟發(fā)展方面的重要作用，為海南自由貿(mào)易港建設(shè)、珠三角港口群國際競爭力提升、上海全球樞紐港建設(shè)、長三角區(qū)域一體化發(fā)展、深圳全球海洋中心城市建設(shè)、浦東國際航運中心核心區(qū)建設(shè)、西部陸海新通道建設(shè)等提供有力的司法服務(wù)和保障。各地海事法院結(jié)合各自區(qū)位優(yōu)勢，主動對接當(dāng)?shù)睾Ｊ滤痉ㄐ滦枨?，制定相?yīng)的實施意見，就海事司法服務(wù)保障高水平對外開放、京津冀協(xié)同發(fā)展、中國（上海）自貿(mào)試驗區(qū)建設(shè)、長江三角洲區(qū)域一體化發(fā)展、長江經(jīng)濟帶高質(zhì)量發(fā)展等國家戰(zhàn)略實施，發(fā)布情況通報及典型案例，各項務(wù)實舉措成效突出。
（二）依法行使海事司法管轄權(quán)，維護國家海洋權(quán)益
海事法院對我國管轄海域依法行使司法管轄權(quán)，平等保護中外當(dāng)事人合法權(quán)益，維護我海洋權(quán)益。2018年5月，廈門海事法院審理的陳某某、詹某某訴阿利茲航運公司船舶碰撞損害責(zé)任糾紛案公開宣判，各方當(dāng)事人均服判息訴。該案是我國海事法院受理的第二起發(fā)生在釣魚島海域的案件，充分彰顯了人民法院依法持續(xù)對我國管轄海域?qū)嵤┯行痉ü茌牎?020年10月，最高人民法院指定?？诤Ｊ路ㄔ鹤鳛楹Ｊ滦淌掳讣茌犜圏c法院，審理外籍漁民文某犯非法捕撈水產(chǎn)品罪和刑事附帶環(huán)境民事公益訴訟案。海口海事法院于2021年3月3日公開宣判，以被告人文某非法捕撈水產(chǎn)品罪判處其有期徒刑并處驅(qū)逐出境，沒收作案工具和非法所得，承擔(dān)生態(tài)修復(fù)費用和生態(tài)評估費用。被告人文某表示服判不上訴。該案系發(fā)生在南海的外籍人員非法進入我國領(lǐng)海進行水產(chǎn)品捕撈的海事刑事案件，是我國海事司法加強海洋生態(tài)環(huán)境保護、打擊海上違法犯罪活動，對我國管轄海域依法行使司法管轄權(quán)的典型案例，凸顯了海事司法在維護國家海洋權(quán)益和海上安全方面的重要作用。
海事法院創(chuàng)新保障海洋權(quán)益的機制體系，充分發(fā)揮海事審判職能作用。?？诤Ｊ路ㄔ撼雠_《海上巡回法庭及島嶼審判點工作制度》，成立海上巡回法庭，開展海上巡回審判和法治宣傳。同時，在西沙晉卿島掛牌成立島嶼審判點，在三沙法庭駐地永興島開展常態(tài)化輪值辦公。海事法院在我國管轄海域以多種形式加大海事司法管轄力度，彰顯了堅決維護國家海洋權(quán)益的態(tài)度、責(zé)任和擔(dān)當(dāng)。
（三）加大海洋環(huán)境司法保護力度，保障海洋生態(tài)文明建設(shè)
保護海洋自然資源和生態(tài)環(huán)境是加快建設(shè)海洋強國、實現(xiàn)人海和諧共生的根本要求和基礎(chǔ)保障，迫切需要不斷加大海洋環(huán)境司法保護力度，為促進海洋生態(tài)文明建設(shè)提供強有力的服務(wù)與保障。海事司法作為海洋生態(tài)環(huán)境保護的重要力量之一，積極探索開展海洋生態(tài)環(huán)境的司法保護實踐，構(gòu)建守護碧海藍天的有力司法防線。
不斷完善配套規(guī)則體系。2018年1月15日起施行的《最高人民法院關(guān)于審理海洋自然資源與生態(tài)環(huán)境損害賠償糾紛案件若干問題的規(guī)定》，明確該類訴訟的性質(zhì)、索賠主體，完善損失認定的一般規(guī)則與替代方法，對規(guī)范統(tǒng)一裁判尺度，全面加強海洋環(huán)境司法保護發(fā)揮重要作用。2020年修訂的《最高人民法院關(guān)于審理船舶油污損害賠償糾紛案件若干問題的規(guī)定》，厘清了該類糾紛的案件管轄、責(zé)任限制、保險人或者財務(wù)保證人的抗辯及賠償范圍等問題，充分體現(xiàn)了中國加入的國際油污損害民事責(zé)任公約等國際公約的精神，為保護海洋環(huán)境提供了有力依據(jù)。海事司法實踐中明確的裁判規(guī)則豐富和發(fā)展了海洋生態(tài)環(huán)境司法規(guī)則體系。?？诤Ｊ路ㄔ簩徖淼暮Ｄ吓R高盈海船務(wù)有限公司訴三沙市漁政支隊行政處罰案，通過正確適用相關(guān)法律和司法解釋，對《瀕危野生動植物種國際貿(mào)易公約》附錄中的珊瑚、硨磲依法予以同等保護，維護三沙海域生態(tài)環(huán)境安全。北海海事法院審理的北海市乃志海洋科技有限公司訴北海市海洋與漁業(yè)局行政處罰案，明確了非法圍填海的主體、共同違法行為的認定及海洋行政處罰裁量權(quán)的行使規(guī)則，對于維護國家海岸線安全、維系海域生態(tài)平衡具有積極意義。上述兩案均入選最高人民法院第31批生物多樣性保護專題指導(dǎo)性案例，確立了同類案件的裁判標準和裁判方法。
有序開展專業(yè)化審判實踐。全國海事審判三級法院不斷強化海洋環(huán)境司法的專業(yè)化審判機制，確保案件的高質(zhì)量審理，加大海洋環(huán)境司法保護力度。最高人民法院在交通運輸部上海打撈局與普羅旺斯船東2008-1有限公司（Provence Shipowner 2008-1 Ltd）、法國達飛輪船有限公司（CMA CGM SA）、羅克韋爾航運有限公司（Rockwell Shipping Limited）船舶污染損害責(zé)任糾紛再審案中，厘清了有關(guān)國內(nèi)法與國際條約的調(diào)整邊界，明確了船舶碰撞事故中非漏油船一方的油污損害賠償責(zé)任及其相關(guān)的責(zé)任限制與責(zé)任限制基金分配規(guī)則，合理平衡了主權(quán)國家海洋環(huán)境利益與航運經(jīng)營者商業(yè)利益之間的關(guān)系，展現(xiàn)了中國海洋生態(tài)司法保護的專業(yè)化水平。廈門海事法院審理的巴拿馬籍“正利洛杉磯(APL LOS ANGELES)”輪燃油泄漏導(dǎo)致海洋污染損害責(zé)任糾紛案，邀請生態(tài)環(huán)境技術(shù)專家參與調(diào)解，發(fā)揮專業(yè)人士作用促成當(dāng)事人達成調(diào)解協(xié)議，并將案件的受理情況和調(diào)解協(xié)議內(nèi)容予以公告，保障了公眾對海洋環(huán)境治理的參與和監(jiān)督。海口海事法院審理首起由檢察機關(guān)提起的海洋行政公益訴訟案件，責(zé)令海洋環(huán)境監(jiān)督管理部門限期履職，履行了有效督促行政部門依法履職，保護海洋自然資源和生態(tài)環(huán)境的職責(zé)。?？诤Ｊ路ㄔ喊l(fā)布海洋環(huán)境資源審判白皮書（2018-2020），總結(jié)海洋環(huán)境資源審判工作經(jīng)驗，提煉相關(guān)法律問題及解決建議，打造海洋環(huán)境資源保護亮點品牌。上海海事法院組建海洋環(huán)境保護專業(yè)審判團隊，聘任專家陪審員和特邀咨詢員，設(shè)置專業(yè)鑒定機構(gòu)名錄，不斷完善專業(yè)化審判機制。專業(yè)化的審判實踐，為確保海洋環(huán)境審判的高水準、高質(zhì)效奠定了堅實基礎(chǔ)。
建立高效司法保護合作機制。各海事法院牢固樹立生態(tài)環(huán)境一體化發(fā)展理念，唱好“大合唱”，打造海洋生態(tài)司法協(xié)作的高水平樣板。廣州、海口、北海海事法院共建共享海洋環(huán)保司法合作平臺，打造“北部灣—瓊州海峽”海洋環(huán)境資源保護“朋友圈”，借助線上調(diào)解、線下協(xié)同工作模式，成功跨域調(diào)解海洋環(huán)境公益訴訟案件。天津、大連、青島海事法院簽署框架協(xié)議，建立聯(lián)席會議機制，開展渤海生態(tài)環(huán)境司法保護協(xié)調(diào)聯(lián)動和深度合作。各海事法院積極參加當(dāng)?shù)攸h委領(lǐng)導(dǎo)或政府主導(dǎo)下的多部門會商機制，加強與檢察、公安、司法行政機關(guān)的協(xié)調(diào)配合。北海海事法院與海事局、海警局、海洋局等建立溝通會商、信息共享、工作交流機制，共同維護北部灣海洋生態(tài)環(huán)境和海域安全。
（四）深入實施海事審判精品戰(zhàn)略，護航海洋經(jīng)濟高質(zhì)量發(fā)展
全國海事審判三級法院緊緊圍繞服務(wù)對外開放與海洋開發(fā)利用、外貿(mào)與航運經(jīng)濟發(fā)展、國際與地區(qū)航運中心建設(shè)等經(jīng)濟社會發(fā)展大局，優(yōu)化審判資源配置，強化精品審判意識，全面提升海事審判公信力和影響力，拓展服務(wù)海洋經(jīng)濟發(fā)展的廣度和深度。
維護航運商貿(mào)秩序。一是依法審結(jié)涉及貨物運輸、綜合物流、船舶碰撞等各類海事案件，保障航運安全，維護國際物流供應(yīng)鏈的穩(wěn)定，引導(dǎo)航運市場規(guī)范有序健康運行，服務(wù)航運經(jīng)濟發(fā)展。廈門海事法院在福建元成豆業(yè)有限公司與復(fù)興航運有限公司（REVIVAL SHIPPING CO.,LTD）海上財產(chǎn)損害責(zé)任糾紛一案中，明確貨物等級和品質(zhì)指標不屬于承運人提單批注義務(wù)的范圍，為海運實務(wù)操作提供指引，維護提單在國際貿(mào)易中的流通性，保障交易安全和資金融通。寧波海事法院在蔣某某與林某某船舶碰撞損害責(zé)任糾紛案件中，準確解讀船員無證駕駛與船舶所有人喪失海事賠償責(zé)任限制的關(guān)系，對進一步規(guī)范水上交通秩序、維護船舶航行安全具有積極意義。武漢海事法院審理的中國科學(xué)院水生生物研究所與潤航船務(wù)有限公司船舶觸碰損害責(zé)任糾紛案件，判決船舶所有人和經(jīng)營人對造成的養(yǎng)殖設(shè)施和珍稀魚類物種損害承擔(dān)連帶賠償責(zé)任，對加強船舶經(jīng)營管理、維護長江航行秩序、促進長江經(jīng)濟帶綠色可持續(xù)發(fā)展，具有積極的引領(lǐng)和規(guī)范作用。大連海事法院靈活運用海事強制令，幫助數(shù)百家進口冷鏈企業(yè)解決清關(guān)難題，加速疫情期間滯港集裝箱及所載貨物的流轉(zhuǎn)，將船貨雙方的損失降至最低，促成海上貨物運輸、國際貿(mào)易和生產(chǎn)加工等一系列合同的順利履行，為疫情下企業(yè)復(fù)工復(fù)產(chǎn)提供強大助力。二是加強對船舶修造、航運融資、航運保險等涉船舶先進制造業(yè)、現(xiàn)代服務(wù)業(yè)發(fā)展案件的審理，促進海事金融產(chǎn)業(yè)活躍增長，推動船舶產(chǎn)業(yè)轉(zhuǎn)型升級，拓展航運服務(wù)產(chǎn)業(yè)鏈，助力優(yōu)化航運發(fā)展軟環(huán)境。上海海事法院審理的啟東市順豐遠洋漁業(yè)公司與上海振華重工啟東海洋工程股份有限公司船舶建造合同糾紛案件，綜合雙方當(dāng)事人履約情況，準確認定違約責(zé)任，在國家大力推進遠洋漁業(yè)發(fā)展背景下，對妥善化解因履行周期長、變更次數(shù)多、涉及金額高而引發(fā)的類似船舶建造合同糾紛，支持遠洋漁業(yè)規(guī)范發(fā)展具有一定的參考意義。廈門海事法院審結(jié)標的額1.4億元的廈船重工股份有限公司申請實現(xiàn)海事?lián)Ｎ餀?quán)糾紛案，單個案件標的額創(chuàng)年度新高。天津海事法院于2018年發(fā)布《船舶融資租賃案件審判白皮書》及典型案例，做好相關(guān)法律問題解讀和風(fēng)險提示，積極為海事金融改革創(chuàng)新保駕護航。2021年5月上海海事法院發(fā)布中英文《服務(wù)保障船舶產(chǎn)業(yè)發(fā)展審判情況通報》，梳理相關(guān)工作舉措、問題建議和典型案例，充分體現(xiàn)了海事司法為推動船舶產(chǎn)業(yè)持續(xù)健康發(fā)展、提升國際競爭力發(fā)揮的重要作用。
促進海洋經(jīng)濟發(fā)展。一是依法審理港口作業(yè)、碼頭建設(shè)、港口疏浚等糾紛，助力沿海沿江港口轉(zhuǎn)型升級、推動港口資源優(yōu)化整合，服務(wù)和保障門戶港建設(shè)。北海海事法院審理中交天津航道局有限公司與防城港務(wù)集團有限公司建設(shè)工程施工合同糾紛案件，準確把握眾多涉案方的利益訴求，依法認定各方責(zé)任，一審判決后各方當(dāng)事人均服判息訴，充分體現(xiàn)了海事審判對港航新基建和海洋開發(fā)的支持，為海洋產(chǎn)業(yè)體系建設(shè)提供了有力支撐。南京、天津等海事法院緊密關(guān)注港口航運領(lǐng)域新科技發(fā)展動態(tài)，及時出臺綠色港口、智慧港口建設(shè)服務(wù)保障措施，為加快建設(shè)世界一流港口提供司法助力。寧波海事法院于2020年發(fā)布《港口碼頭等水域工程建設(shè)糾紛審判情況報告》，結(jié)合糾紛特點提出精準法律建議，為深化實施涉海涉港領(lǐng)域供給側(cè)結(jié)構(gòu)性改革，繼續(xù)打造浙江省“一體兩翼多聯(lián)”港口發(fā)展格局提供司法服務(wù)保障。二是妥善審理涉及海洋工程、郵輪旅游、海洋開發(fā)利用等案件，發(fā)揮海事司法在化解海洋經(jīng)濟矛盾糾紛、促進海洋經(jīng)濟要素運行方面的重要職能作用，促進海洋的科學(xué)開發(fā)利用，為海洋優(yōu)勢產(chǎn)業(yè)和新興產(chǎn)業(yè)發(fā)展提供司法支持。廈門海事法院圓滿審結(jié)以總投資近50億元的海上風(fēng)電場工程施工養(yǎng)殖損害賠償糾紛等為代表的一批海洋工程、海洋新產(chǎn)業(yè)和新業(yè)態(tài)案件，為助力我國海洋工程設(shè)備創(chuàng)新、保障海洋經(jīng)濟發(fā)展提供有力司法保障。青島海事法院和山東省高級人民法院審理我國首個全潛式深海養(yǎng)殖裝備“深藍一號”建造合同糾紛案，合理劃分雙方的責(zé)任、確定損失的數(shù)額，既注意保護出資方的合法權(quán)益，也注意保護研制建造單位的創(chuàng)新積極性，并積極探索判后調(diào)解模式，促成雙方當(dāng)事人在判決基礎(chǔ)上達成和解并自動履行完畢，成為保障國產(chǎn)深遠海漁業(yè)規(guī)?；B(yǎng)殖成功，助力我國海洋網(wǎng)箱養(yǎng)殖規(guī)?；涂萍己坎粩嗵岣叩男骂愋偷湫桶咐?。上海海事法院審理羊某某與英國嘉年華郵輪有限公司海上人身損害責(zé)任糾紛案件，準確適用我國加入的《1974年海上旅客及其行李運輸雅典公約》作出裁判，為推進郵輪旅游發(fā)展示范區(qū)和上海國際航運中心軟實力建設(shè)持續(xù)升級提供司法指引。被告在判決后不僅及時履行賠償義務(wù)，還針對判決認定采取積極的改進措施。該案被新加坡國立大學(xué)海商法數(shù)據(jù)庫收錄。
營造市場化法治化國際化營商環(huán)境。全國海事審判三級法院依法行使管轄權(quán)，恪守國際條約義務(wù)，尊重意思自治，準確適用準據(jù)法,妥善審理涉外涉港澳臺案件，平等保護中外當(dāng)事人合法權(quán)益,不斷提高海事審判的國際公信力和影響力，為優(yōu)化營商環(huán)境、服務(wù)高水平對外開放發(fā)揮司法護航作用。廈門海事法院在益利船務(wù)有限公司與施某某等光船租賃擔(dān)保合同糾紛案件中，認定非對稱管轄權(quán)條款（Asymmetric Jurisdiction Clause）有效，體現(xiàn)了對當(dāng)事人意思自治的充分尊重，符合國際商事海事交往的發(fā)展趨勢和實踐需求。南京海事法院在審理挪威籍船東BOA BARGES AS與南京奕淳船舶制造有限公司船舶建造合同糾紛一案中，雙方當(dāng)事人主動協(xié)商變更原先的倫敦仲裁和適用英國法的約定，選擇在南京海事法院提起訴訟并適用中國法，法院用時27天化解持續(xù)5年的糾紛，展示海事司法的中國速度。青島海事法院在依法扣押馬紹爾群島籍“尼莉莎（M/V NERISSA）”輪案中，外方當(dāng)事人放棄倫敦仲裁，在法院促成下達成和解協(xié)議，新船東特意將船舶更名為“尊重（Respect）”，致敬中國法治。上海海事法院準確適用英國判例法審理勝船海事公司（Winship Maritime Inc.）船舶建造傭金合同糾紛案，雙方當(dāng)事人均服判息訴，實現(xiàn)準確適用外國法定分止爭的良好效果，為涉外商事海事審判中外國判例法的查明與適用提供了實踐樣本，該案例刊載于英國知名出版社INFORMA PLC.出版的《中國海事商事法律報告》（《ChineseMaritimeandCommercialLawReports》）并收錄于其電子數(shù)據(jù)庫。朝鮮籍船舶“禿魯峰3（TU RU BONG 3）”輪與韓國籍貨船“海霓（HIGHNY）”輪在非我國管轄海域發(fā)生碰撞，雙方當(dāng)事人合意選擇由上海海事法院行使管轄權(quán)并適用中國法。該案以及寧波、?？诘群Ｊ路ㄔ簩徖淼亩嗥饑H海事糾紛均系與中國沒有連結(jié)點的外方當(dāng)事人主動選擇在中國海事法院提起訴訟，體現(xiàn)了對我國海事司法的信任，彰顯了海事審判服務(wù)國家對外開放，營造穩(wěn)定、公平、透明、可預(yù)期營商環(huán)境取得顯著成效。
（五）維護船員合法權(quán)益，促進航運業(yè)健康穩(wěn)定發(fā)展
依法維護船員合法權(quán)益，對保障海上交通安全、維護航運業(yè)健康穩(wěn)定發(fā)展具有重要意義。2020年最高人民法院制定《關(guān)于審理涉船員糾紛案件若干問題的規(guī)定》，對涉船員糾紛的船員勞動合同與勞務(wù)合同、居間合同等不同法律關(guān)系的認定及解決路徑、船舶優(yōu)先權(quán)、船員工資報酬的法律保護等問題作出規(guī)定，并在2020年6月25日“世界海員日”來臨之際發(fā)布維護船員合法權(quán)益典型案例8件，涉及船舶優(yōu)先權(quán)的具體認定、人身損害賠償消除城鄉(xiāng)差別、保護墊付費用第三方取得的船舶優(yōu)先權(quán)等法律問題，體現(xiàn)誠實守信的社會主義核心價值觀，為彌補立法缺位以及法規(guī)、規(guī)章規(guī)定較為原則的不足，提供明確的裁判指引，彰顯了海事司法對維護船員合法權(quán)益，規(guī)范引導(dǎo)船員市場和航運市場秩序，促進船員服務(wù)行業(yè)高質(zhì)量健康發(fā)展的重要作用。
各海事法院創(chuàng)新司法舉措，全方位保護船員合法權(quán)益。一是制定船員人身損害糾紛、勞務(wù)糾紛簡案快審操作規(guī)程，開通綠色通道，做到“快立、快保、快審、快執(zhí)”，縮短船員合法權(quán)益實現(xiàn)的周期。二是構(gòu)建“訴前聯(lián)動糾紛解決”機制，與政府部門建立協(xié)作機制，快速高效化解糾紛。三是加大司法救助力度。積極申請司法救助金，保證疫情防控期間因案致困致貧船員維持基本生活。四是為國際船員的遣返提供人道主義援助。青島海事法院審理的利比里亞籍“獅子（Sam Lion）”輪、廣州海事法院審理的希臘籍“天使力量（Angelic Power）”輪等船員勞務(wù)合同糾紛案件中，各海事法院在依法扣押拍賣外輪過程中，安全、高效遣返外籍船員，贏得外國外交機構(gòu)和外方當(dāng)事人的高度評價，為妥善處置疫情期間全球性海員遣返難題、幫助航運企業(yè)復(fù)工復(fù)產(chǎn)提供了“中國方案”。五是大連、廈門等海事法院專門發(fā)布涉船員糾紛審判情況專項報告，通報基本情況、工作亮點、審判觀點和意見建議，延伸海事司法服務(wù)，不斷提升船員的幸福感、安全感和獲得感，促進了航運業(yè)的良性發(fā)展。
三、 持續(xù)強化審判體系和能力建設(shè)，推進國際海事司法中心建設(shè)
隨著“一帶一路”建設(shè)的不斷推進，國際航運中心繼續(xù)向亞太地區(qū)和我國轉(zhuǎn)移。海事司法是國際航運中心軟實力的重要組成部分，中國航運貿(mào)易持續(xù)增長為海事審判提供了更加廣闊的空間，進一步提升我國海事司法的國際地位和影響力，已是緊迫的現(xiàn)實需求、歷史的必然選擇以及大國的應(yīng)有擔(dān)當(dāng)。
（一）完善涉海法律體系建設(shè)，提供海事審判制度保障
隨著航運貿(mào)易實踐的發(fā)展、相關(guān)法律的修改，海商法、海事訴訟特別程序法在實施過程中逐漸出現(xiàn)了很多與實踐不相適應(yīng)的問題，進一步提升和完善特色鮮明、科學(xué)合理的海事法律制度迫在眉睫。2018年9月，修改海商法作為“需要抓緊工作、條件成熟時提請審議”的第二類項目，列入十三屆全國人大常委會發(fā)布的立法項目。該項工作由交通運輸部負責(zé)牽頭，最高人民法院深度參與海商法修法工作，組織全國資深海事法官進行研討，結(jié)合審判實踐提出修改意見，為海商法的修訂貢獻司法實踐智慧。2019年7月，為了不斷完善中國特色海事訴訟制度體系，推進建設(shè)國際海事司法中心，最高人民法院成立工作專班，針對修改海事訴訟特別程序法的必要性和可行性進行深入研究，在廣泛征求意見的基礎(chǔ)上，于2021年11月向全國人大常委會報送《關(guān)于建議修改<中華人民共和國海事訴訟特別程序法>的報告》，推動海事訴訟特別程序法修改納入立法規(guī)劃，并對重點修改內(nèi)容提出了具體建議。該報告得到全國人大法工委的充分肯定，體現(xiàn)了最高人民法院科學(xué)總結(jié)海事訴訟30多年司法實踐的成效和經(jīng)驗，與時俱進將海事訴訟法律制度逐步打造成為世界海事訴訟立法藍本，向國際社會傳播我國先進成熟的海事立法及司法經(jīng)驗的信心和決心。
2019年2月，最高人民法院審理的浙江隆達不銹鋼有限公司訴A.P.穆勒-馬士基有限公司(A.P. Moller-Maersk A/S)海上貨物運輸合同糾紛案、阿昌格羅斯投資公司(Archangelos Investments E.N.E.)“加百利（Archangelos Gabriel）”輪海難救助案和阿斯特克有限公司（ASTKCO.，LTD）申請設(shè)立海事賠償責(zé)任限制基金案入選最高人民法院第21批指導(dǎo)性案例。2019年12月，天津市高級人民法院二審的呂某某等79人訴山海關(guān)船舶重工有限責(zé)任公司海上污染損害責(zé)任糾紛案入選最高人民法院第24批指導(dǎo)性案例。海事指導(dǎo)性案例歸納了具有普遍指導(dǎo)意義的法律適用規(guī)則，積極回應(yīng)海事司法實踐中反復(fù)出現(xiàn)但仍有爭議的法律問題或者新類型案件的裁判規(guī)則，為同類案件的裁判提供了具體、明確的指導(dǎo)和參照。
2020年6月，最高人民法院發(fā)布《關(guān)于依法妥善審理涉新冠肺炎疫情民事案件若干問題的指導(dǎo)意見（三）》，聚焦受疫情影響較大的運輸合同、船舶建造、涉船員糾紛等案件的適用法律問題，提出解決方案，穩(wěn)定中外當(dāng)事人合理預(yù)期。該指導(dǎo)意見被聯(lián)合國貿(mào)法會法規(guī)判例法系統(tǒng)收錄。2021年12月，最高人民法院發(fā)布《全國法院涉外商事海事審判工作座談會會議紀要》，對涉及運輸合同、船舶物權(quán)等海事案件，仲裁司法審查案件，涉外案件送達、法律適用等問題作出規(guī)定，統(tǒng)一裁判尺度，成為全國海事審判實踐的指南。自2018年-2021年，最高人民法院連續(xù)發(fā)布年度典型案例41件，充分展現(xiàn)了海事審判在提升海事司法理念、統(tǒng)一裁判尺度、提高訴訟服務(wù)水平等方面取得的成效，對完善和豐富新類型案件裁判規(guī)則，不斷提升海事司法影響力和公信力具有重大意義。
（二）創(chuàng)新工作制度機制，完善海事審判體系
海事司法體系布局不斷優(yōu)化。為服務(wù)保障長江經(jīng)濟帶發(fā)展和長三角區(qū)域一體化發(fā)展等國家戰(zhàn)略，不斷滿足人民群眾多元司法需求，對海事司法資源進行重要調(diào)整，2019年新設(shè)南京海事法院。為提供更便利的訴訟條件，武漢海事法院新設(shè)蕪湖法庭，上海海事法院新設(shè)長興島法庭，寧波海事法院新設(shè)寧波自貿(mào)試驗區(qū)法庭、籌備設(shè)立杭州法庭。海事法院派出法庭積極融入當(dāng)?shù)氐膰H與區(qū)域性航運中心、自貿(mào)試驗區(qū)、“藍色經(jīng)濟區(qū)”、中外工業(yè)園區(qū)建設(shè)等重點工作，受到地方黨政機關(guān)的充分肯定。目前，全國11個海事法院共設(shè)立42個派出法庭和多個巡回審判點，以適應(yīng)海事法院管轄區(qū)域線長面廣的特點，增強海事審判的服務(wù)保障能力，極大方便了當(dāng)事人訴訟。
海事行政訴訟審理機制更加成熟。海事行政審判支持監(jiān)督海事行政機關(guān)依法行政，促進行政執(zhí)法尺度統(tǒng)一，維護行政相對人合法權(quán)益，對助力涉海法治環(huán)境、營商環(huán)境、生態(tài)環(huán)境改善優(yōu)化發(fā)揮了重要作用。寧波海事法院審理不服行政機關(guān)對“三無”船舶的行政處罰決定糾紛案件，體現(xiàn)了海事司法為依法開展海上執(zhí)法活動，維護海運秩序，保護海上人命、財產(chǎn)和海洋生態(tài)環(huán)境安全提供的有力支持和監(jiān)督。廈門海事法院審理福建省泉州海絲船舶評估咨詢有限公司訴福鼎市海洋與漁業(yè)局濫用行政權(quán)力限制競爭案件，對規(guī)制、監(jiān)督超越職權(quán)、濫用職權(quán)等違法行政行為，促進涉海行政機關(guān)提升依法行政水平和維護公開公平公正的市場競爭秩序，具有積極的導(dǎo)向意義。天津海事法院審理天津至臻化工科技發(fā)展有限公司訴北疆海事局、天津海事局行政處罰案件，對規(guī)范危險化學(xué)品的管理和運輸具有良好指引作用。各地海事法院注重與行政機關(guān)的溝通協(xié)調(diào)，府院良性聯(lián)動機制不斷完善。寧波海事法院與浙江省司法廳聯(lián)合設(shè)立浙江省海事行政爭議調(diào)解中心，海事行政爭議實質(zhì)性化解工作成效明顯。大連、天津、廈門、寧波等海事法院發(fā)布海事行政審判白皮書及典型案例，從司法角度對行政機關(guān)依法行政提出合理建議。
海事刑事案件試點穩(wěn)步推進。最高人民法院有序推進海事法院試點管轄海事刑事案件，繼2017年2月指定寧波海事法院試點管轄海事刑事案件之后，又指定海口海事法院試點受理了兩件被告人犯非法捕撈水產(chǎn)品罪案件，并授權(quán)海南省高級人民法院指定海口海事法院試點管轄特定類型海事刑事案件。寧波、?？诤Ｊ路ㄔ鹤鳛楹Ｊ滦淌掳讣茌犜圏c法院，積極與偵查、公訴機關(guān)建立協(xié)作工作機制，加強海事刑事案件的程序銜接。海南省高級人民法院與海南省人民檢察院聯(lián)合印發(fā)《關(guān)于建立海上刑事案件個案指定管轄工作機制的意見（試行）》，規(guī)范對海事刑事案件的移送、起訴等程序。寧波海事法院與舟山市人民檢察院簽署《關(guān)于加強協(xié)作配合推動海事審判與海洋檢察工作高質(zhì)量發(fā)展的紀要》，并在浙江省高級人民法院支持下持續(xù)加強與偵查機關(guān)、公訴機關(guān)以及其他有關(guān)政府部門的協(xié)作共商，探索建立相關(guān)工作機制。
（三）推進訴訟服務(wù)體系建設(shè)，打造海事糾紛解決優(yōu)選地
提升司法服務(wù)水平。2019年8月30日，全國海事法院在全國范圍內(nèi)率先實現(xiàn)跨域立案，當(dāng)事人可在全國任一海事法院立案窗口辦理所有海事法院的立案手續(xù)。各地海事法院還陸續(xù)實現(xiàn)跨域材料轉(zhuǎn)遞、跨域卷宗查閱、跨域領(lǐng)取文書等訴訟服務(wù)功能，通過互聯(lián)網(wǎng)為中外當(dāng)事人提供訴訟指南、案件查詢等服務(wù)，徹底打破管轄區(qū)域的地理限制。各海事法院持續(xù)深入漁村、碼頭等邊遠地區(qū)開展巡回收案、糾紛調(diào)處和法律宣傳，打通海事司法服務(wù)最后一公里；與港航、商貿(mào)企業(yè)建立常態(tài)化交流機制，了解司法需求，提供司法服務(wù)，幫助企業(yè)防范化解法律風(fēng)險，海事司法影響力和輻射力顯著提升。上海、南京、武漢、寧波海事法院積極回應(yīng)長三角一體化發(fā)展司法需求和司法關(guān)切，主動服務(wù)和融入長三角一體化發(fā)展，加強跨域司法協(xié)作，共同打造海事法院司法合作標桿示范。為提升涉外審判便利化程度，上海海事法院探索推廣海事訴訟代理概括性授權(quán)司法認可機制，認可境外當(dāng)事人授權(quán)我國境內(nèi)的律師事務(wù)所、律師或者其在我國境內(nèi)的分支機構(gòu)對一定時期、一定范圍內(nèi)的訴訟案件進行代理，化解因辦理授權(quán)委托公證認證手續(xù)導(dǎo)致涉外案件審判周期過長的問題，極大提升辦案效率。10個海事法院設(shè)立英文門戶網(wǎng)站，向全世界傳播中國海事司法的聲音。遼寧省高級人民法院為涉外海事審判配備同聲傳譯室，實現(xiàn)庭審的多語種同聲傳譯；廈門海事法院為部分民事裁判文書提供英文參考譯本；上海海事法院推出中英文雙語海事訴訟指南；廣州、寧波等海事法院為外國當(dāng)事人提供多語言訴訟服務(wù)。海事法院多語種應(yīng)用走在中國法院的前列，在為當(dāng)事人提供訴訟服務(wù)便利的同時，用海內(nèi)外看得到、聽得懂的方式講述中國海事司法故事，增強海事司法的國際傳播力。
推動海事糾紛多元化解決。各海事法院堅持源頭化解，靠前服務(wù)，把非訴訟糾紛解決機制挺在前面，大力推進“兩個一站式”建設(shè)，形成矛盾糾紛化解的“多車道”。南京海事法院在案源多發(fā)地設(shè)立水上交通事故、港口、涉漁糾紛一站式解紛中心，倡導(dǎo)訴前化解案件。天津海事法院設(shè)立京津冀貨運代理糾紛調(diào)解中心，精準服務(wù)海運貨運代理行業(yè)。上海、廣州、武漢、天津等多家海事法院與中國海事仲裁委員會建立海事案件委托仲裁調(diào)解機制，上海海事法院與中國海事仲裁委員會共同發(fā)布《海事案件委托調(diào)解白皮書》，充分發(fā)揮仲裁機構(gòu)的優(yōu)勢，糾紛化解成功率不斷上升。大連海事法院在院本部和派出法庭設(shè)立訴調(diào)對接中心，以優(yōu)質(zhì)高效的解紛服務(wù)助力市場化法治化國際化營商環(huán)境建設(shè)。青島海事法院與榮成海洋與漁業(yè)局、濰坊漁業(yè)協(xié)會等單位就訴前調(diào)解、漁船燃油補貼等事項達成協(xié)議，暢通訴調(diào)對接渠道。寧波海事法院發(fā)布海上楓橋經(jīng)驗白皮書，及時總結(jié)推廣經(jīng)驗。海事法院一站式多元解紛機制和一站式訴訟服務(wù)中心建設(shè)特色突出，收獲累累成果。
增強海事司法透明度。各海事法院積極拓展司法公開渠道，增強公開效果，構(gòu)建開放、動態(tài)、透明、便民的陽光海事司法機制。自2018年至2021年，各海事法院連續(xù)發(fā)布中英文年度海事審判白皮書、專題審判報告55件，涉及海事法院全面工作，以及海上貨物運輸合同、船舶碰撞、船舶共有、海洋漁業(yè)、海事執(zhí)行等多個法律專題，全方位多角度公開審判執(zhí)行數(shù)據(jù)、工作亮點、問題建議和典型案例等，在全國法院系統(tǒng)獨具特色，展示真實、立體、全面的中國海事司法，不斷提升透明度，擴大國內(nèi)國際影響力。2020年大連海事法院裁判文書上網(wǎng)率、依托中國審判流程信息公開網(wǎng)實現(xiàn)審判流程有效公開率均居所在省中級法院第1位。中國社會科學(xué)院法學(xué)研究所持續(xù)關(guān)注中國海事法院司法公開狀況，連續(xù)發(fā)布中國海事司法透明度指數(shù)報告，對海事法院典型案例發(fā)布、外文網(wǎng)站建設(shè)等司法公開化舉措給予積極評價。
（四）注重強化隊伍建設(shè)，增強海事司法能力
加強培訓(xùn)調(diào)研。一是強化實務(wù)培訓(xùn)。最高人民法院和相關(guān)高級人民法院定期開展海事審判實務(wù)培訓(xùn)和進行針對性授課指導(dǎo)，提升海事審判隊伍整體業(yè)務(wù)能力。二是開展法治研究。最高人民法院充分發(fā)揮先后在上海海事法院、浙江省高級人民法院和廣州海事法院設(shè)立的國際海事司法基地的作用，密切關(guān)注海事司法理論和實務(wù)前沿?zé)狳c和新情況、新問題，加強前瞻性調(diào)查研究，切實增強司法調(diào)研的針對性和時效性，為建設(shè)國際海事司法中心，助力構(gòu)建海洋命運共同體進行理論和實踐探索。三是深化學(xué)術(shù)研討。各海事法院積極設(shè)立各類學(xué)術(shù)交流平臺，鼓勵審判人員提升學(xué)術(shù)研究能力。由寧波、廣州、廈門海事法院先后承辦的全國海事審判研討會，緊貼國家發(fā)展戰(zhàn)略和海事審判實務(wù)工作需要開展研討，不斷推動海事審判理論研究走深走實。廣州海事法院舉辦的廣州海法論壇、武漢海事法院依托長江海商法學(xué)會舉辦的學(xué)會年會等平臺已初步成為規(guī)格較高、全國知名的海事海商法研討學(xué)術(shù)盛會。海事法官活躍在中國海法高端論壇、東亞海法論壇、各地海商法學(xué)研究會年會上，為各類海事海商學(xué)術(shù)研究貢獻智慧，展示海事法官的風(fēng)采。不斷強化的培訓(xùn)調(diào)研，為提升海事審判水平和能力，打造高素質(zhì)的海事審判專業(yè)隊伍奠定了堅實基礎(chǔ)。
擴大國際交流。最高人民法院于2021年10月舉辦海上絲綢之路（泉州）司法合作國際論壇，與來自巴西、俄羅斯、新加坡、南非等21個國家和國際海事組織、國際海底管理局等國際組織代表，圍繞海洋自然資源與生態(tài)環(huán)境保護法律問題、船舶司法出售的國際承認問題、新冠疫情下船員權(quán)益的保護等海事熱點問題進行深入討論，廣泛凝聚各國對共建“一帶一路”和構(gòu)建海洋命運共同體理念的共識，有力促進與會各方在司法領(lǐng)域的互學(xué)互鑒與交流合作。最高人民法院持續(xù)派員積極參與《船舶司法出售國際效力公約草案》（北京草案）的制定，為推動草案的公約化進程發(fā)揮重要作用，不斷提升中國司法的國際話語權(quán)和影響力。從海事法院選拔優(yōu)秀人才參加中英、中法、中新、中非等多個國際法治論壇、研討活動以及可轉(zhuǎn)讓多式聯(lián)運單證法律問題研究等國際會議，更多中國法官登上國際舞臺，詮釋中國法治經(jīng)驗，為國際規(guī)則的形成和制定貢獻“中國智慧”。廣州海事法院和大連海事大學(xué)法學(xué)院聯(lián)合舉辦“東亞海法論壇”，為海事法官提供與來自中國香港、日本、韓國的海商法學(xué)者、海事律師和航運界人士交流的平臺。不斷深入的國際交流，為培養(yǎng)具有國際視野、通曉國際海事法律、熟悉國際航運實務(wù)的復(fù)合型海事審判專業(yè)隊伍創(chuàng)造了實踐平臺。
（五）強化現(xiàn)代科技支撐，提升海事審判信息化水平
建設(shè)全新中國海事審判網(wǎng)。2021年最高人民法院規(guī)劃“中國海事審判網(wǎng)”，打造一體化智能平臺，由廣東省高級人民法院支持、廣州海事法院承建。網(wǎng)站并存中、英文兩種界面，設(shè)置內(nèi)外網(wǎng)兩個平臺，覆蓋全國11家海事法院及其上訴審高級人民法院和最高人民法院的海事審判業(yè)務(wù)，面向中外當(dāng)事人提供網(wǎng)上立案、線上庭審、云端執(zhí)行等在線訴訟服務(wù)，打造全能化數(shù)字海事訴訟新模式；面向社會公眾和專家學(xué)者發(fā)布權(quán)威海事司法信息、展示海事司法成就，拓展海事司法的公眾傳播力；面向海事法官提供輔助辦案、科學(xué)管理的智慧支撐，滿足海事審判工作需求。網(wǎng)站打通、鏈接、融合人民法院各類信息化平臺，通過信息共建共享共用，實現(xiàn)“智服、智宣、智審、智管”多重功能，推動海事審判與智慧法院建設(shè)深度融合，促進提升海事審判智能化水平。網(wǎng)站設(shè)置的The Voice of Judge（法官說法）、船舶扣押拍賣、船舶數(shù)據(jù)分析系統(tǒng)、船舶評估系統(tǒng)、海事司法案例庫等具有海事特色的欄目和功能，對于便利當(dāng)事人訴訟、提升海事審判質(zhì)效、展示海事審判成就、提高海事司法影響力、推動海事審判高質(zhì)量發(fā)展具有重要意義。
推動智慧海事法院特色化發(fā)展。各地海事法院依托信息化、大數(shù)據(jù)科技成果，積極開發(fā)各具特色的審判輔助工具，提升海事審判信息化水平。廣州海事法院開發(fā)的“船舶評估系統(tǒng)”，通過根據(jù)船舶價值評估方法構(gòu)建系統(tǒng)數(shù)據(jù)模型，可以快速、準確地免費評估船舶價值，為當(dāng)事人節(jié)省傳統(tǒng)評估所需的時間和費用，為案件調(diào)解、船舶拍賣提供綠色、環(huán)保、低碳的專業(yè)數(shù)據(jù)參考。上海海事法院開發(fā)的“船貨港數(shù)據(jù)一體化智能輔助系統(tǒng)”，具備船舶實時查詢、軌跡查詢、船舶碰撞模擬和船舶預(yù)警追蹤四大功能，通過大數(shù)據(jù)為海上侵權(quán)糾紛的碰撞事實、碰撞緊迫局面成因等提供智能化分析，為法官審理案件提供信息化支撐。寧波海事法院依托最高人民法院國際海事司法浙江基地打造的海事司法案例庫，系全國首個深度融合海事法律專業(yè)知識服務(wù)+案例大數(shù)據(jù)智推的互聯(lián)網(wǎng)海事法律服務(wù)平臺。截至2021年底，案例庫的海事裁判欄目收錄122115條裁判文書數(shù)據(jù)，涵蓋海事法官辦案所需的各類海事專業(yè)數(shù)據(jù)資源，為類案、關(guān)聯(lián)案件強制檢索機制的有效運行提供可靠保障，有助于規(guī)范法官裁量權(quán)、統(tǒng)一裁判尺度。海事審判信息化、數(shù)字化、智能化建設(shè)全面推進，司法與數(shù)字科技融合，線下訴訟與線上訴訟融合，推動了訴訟模式變革。疫情期間，各海事法院依托智慧法院建設(shè)成果，有效克服疫情對正常訴訟活動的影響，切實為中外當(dāng)事人提供全方位全流程“無接觸式”在線訴訟服務(wù)，實現(xiàn)“審判執(zhí)行不停擺、公平正義不止步”，科技賦能海事司法展現(xiàn)廣闊前景。
后 記
黨的二十大報告指出：“推進高水平對外開放”“發(fā)展海洋經(jīng)濟，保護海洋生態(tài)環(huán)境，加快建設(shè)海洋強國”?！吨腥A人民共和國國民經(jīng)濟和社會發(fā)展第十四個五年規(guī)劃和2035年遠景目標綱要》提出：“堅持陸海統(tǒng)籌、人海和諧、合作共贏，協(xié)同推進海洋生態(tài)保護、海洋經(jīng)濟發(fā)展和海洋權(quán)益維護，加快建設(shè)海洋強國”“加強海事司法建設(shè)，堅決維護國家海洋權(quán)益”。面對新形勢新任務(wù)，全國海事審判三級法院將繼續(xù)堅持以習(xí)近平新時代中國特色社會主義思想為指導(dǎo)，深入踐行習(xí)近平法治思想，認真學(xué)習(xí)貫徹黨的二十大精神，充分發(fā)揮海事審判職能作用，向海圖強，奮發(fā)有為，努力為建設(shè)現(xiàn)代海洋產(chǎn)業(yè)體系、打造可持續(xù)海洋生態(tài)環(huán)境、深度參與全球海洋治理貢獻司法智慧和力量。滴水穿石，涓流成河。中國海事審判，正沿著建設(shè)國際海事司法中心、參與構(gòu)建海洋命運共同體的航道加速前行。
附錄：
1、2018-2021年期間發(fā)布、修訂的涉海司法解釋
2、2018-2021年期間發(fā)布的海事指導(dǎo)性案例和典型案例
附錄1：
2018-2021年期間發(fā)布、修訂的涉海司法解釋
附錄2：
2018-2021年期間發(fā)布的海事指導(dǎo)性案例和典型案例
China Maritime Trial (2018-2021)
Preface
The vast and azure ocean carries the long-standing dream of mankind. In realizing the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation, it is of vital strategic importance to pursue coordinated land and marine development, and to step up efforts to build China into a strong maritime country. Maritime trials safeguard the construction of a strong maritime nation in accordance with the law, and shoulder the responsibilities of safeguarding the national marine rights and interests, protecting the marine ecological environment, and promoting the high-quality development of the marine economy.
Since the establishment of the Maritime Courts, China’s maritime trial has been increasingly sophisticated day by day. China has become a maritime judicial center in the Asia-Pacific region and is moving towards the goal of building an international maritime judicial center.
During the period from 2018 to 2021, the global trade situation has become more complicated and volatile, and the fluctuation of the world shipping economy has intensified.With the far-reaching impact of the pandemic, the evolution of the unprecedented change of the century has accelerated. With Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era as guidance, the courts participating in maritime adjudication nationwide thoroughly study and implement Xi Jinping Thought on the Rule of Law. Committed to the original aspiration and mission, they serve and safeguard the overall layout of the Party and the government, and give full play to the functions and roles of maritime trials. Thus, new progress in all aspects of work and the further expansion of international influence are achieved. China maritime trial is geared towards the goal of building an international maritime judicial center. By gathering the strength to forge ahead, it strives to write a new chapter in the field.
I. General Introduction of Maritime Trial and Enforcement Nationwide
(I) Overall situation
From 2018 to 2021, the courts participating in maritime adjudication nationwide (Maritime Court; High People’s Court in the place where the Maritime Court is located; Supreme People’s Court) accepted 132,633 cases of marine and maritime disputes, maritime administration, maritime crimes, and maritime enforcement. 133,309 cases have been concluded.
Annex 1: The Statistics of Maritime Trial and Enforcement Cases Accepted in China (2018-2021)
Annex 2: The Statistics of Maritime Cases Concluded in China (2018-2021)
(II) Brief Introduction of Maritime Cases by Category
From 2018 to 2021, 89,384 cases of marine and maritime disputeshad been accepted, and 88,764 cases had been concluded (60.78% of which were cases of maritime disputes, 16.7% of which were cases of special maritime procedure, 7.67% of which were cases of marine disputes and 14.85% of which were other maritime cases). 4,339 maritime administrative cases had been accepted, 4,227 of which had been concluded. The maritime courts accepted 45 maritime criminal cases on a pilot basis (not including cases of designated jurisdiction and cases of instruction upon request), including 41 cases from the Ningbo Maritime Court and 4 cases from the Haikou Maritime Court.
Annex 3: The Proportions of Different Types of Maritime Cases in China (2018-2021)
Annex 4: The Proportions of Different Causes of Action of Maritime Cases in China (2018-2021)
(III) Situation of Cases involving Hong Kong, Macao, Taiwan,and Foreign Elements
From 2018 to 2021, courts at three levels nationwide accepted 10,397 cases involving foreign elements and 2,693 cases involving Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan elements. Among them, 10,611 cases involving foreign elements and 2,782 cases involving Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan elements were concluded after being heard. 9,226 cases involving foreign elements and 1,410 cases involving Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan elements were accepted by the eleven maritime courts. And 9,437 cases involving foreign elements and 1,435 cases involving Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan elements were concluded after being heard. The cases covered more than 100 countries and regions. The country which is the most frequently involved in the above-mentioned cases is Bahamas, followed by the United States, Singapore, Germany, and Denmark.
(IV) Situation of Vessel Seizure and Auction
From 2018 to 2021, 2,717 vessels had been seized by the eleven maritime courts, including 105 foreign-flagged vessels and 24 vessels registered in Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan. 1,252 vessels had been auctioned, including 30 foreign-flagged vessels and 9 vessels registered in Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan. Flag countries on the top lists of seized vessels are Russia, Panama, Liberia, Marshall Islands, and Vietnam. Flag countries on the top lists of auctioned vessels are Liberia, Panama, Marshall Islands, Belize, and Singapore.
(V) Situation of Enforcement
From 2018 to 2021, 38,795 cases of maritime enforcement had been accepted by eleven maritime courts and 39,897 cases had been concluded.
Annex 5: The Statistics of Maritime Enforcement Cases Accepted and Concluded in China (2018-2021)
II. Giving Full Play to the Functions of Maritime Trial in an Aide to Build China into a Strong Maritime Country
Building China into a strong maritime country is one of the major strategic tasks for realizing the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation as well as an important part of the socialist cause with Chinese characteristics. Directly serving shipping for foreign trade and marine development, maritime trials are closely related to China's judicial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests. They shoulder the important task of serving and safeguarding the construction of a strong maritime nation. The courts participating in maritime adjudication nationwide have taken the initiative to serve and safeguard the overall layout of the Party and the government by giving full play to the functions of maritime trials, firmly safeguarding China’s maritime rights and interests, vigorously promoting the development of the marine economy, and protecting the marine ecology. They have made positive contributions to serving and safeguarding a high-standard opening-up and the construction of a strong maritime nation, and achieved remarkable and outstanding results.
(I) Adhering to scientific planning to serve and safeguard the national strategy
In order to give full play to the important role of maritime trials in serving and safeguarding major national strategies and promoting the construction of a new development pattern, the Supreme People's Court (SPC) has deepened its top-level design and encouraged engagement with local governments with the aim of serving and safeguarding a high-standard opening-up and the construction of a strong maritime nation. From 2018 to 2021, it had issued a series of judicial documents including Opinions on Providing Judicial Services and Protection for Hainan's Comprehensively Deepening Reform and Opening-up, Opinions on Providing Judicial Services and Protection for the Construction of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macau Greater Bay Area, Opinions on the People's Courts to Further Provide Judicial Services and Protection for the Construction of the Belt and Road Initiative, Opinions on the People's Court to Provide Judicial Services and Protection for the Construction of the Lingang Special Area of the China (Shanghai) Pilot Free Trade Zone, Instruction Opinions on the People's Courts to Serve and Safeguard the Further Expansion of Opening-up, Opinions on Supporting and Safeguarding the Construction of Shenzhen into a Pilot Demonstration Area of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics, Opinions on the People's Courts' Provision of Judicial Services and Protection for the Construction of the Hainan Free Trade Port, Opinions on the People's Courts to Support and Safeguard the High-standard Reform and Opening-up of the Pudong New Area to Build a Pioneer Area for Socialist Modernization. With these documents, the Supreme People's Court has guided maritime courts at all levels to improve judicial efficiency, innovate trial mechanisms, strengthen team building, and give full play to the important role of maritime justice in safeguarding national maritime rights and interests, protecting the marine ecological environment, and promoting the development of the marine economy. In this way, they serve to provide judicial services and protection for the construction of the Hainan Free Trade Port, the enhancement of the international competitiveness of the port cluster at Pearl River Delta, the construction of Shanghai towards a global hub port, the integrated development of the Yangtze River Delta, the construction of Shenzhen towards the leading maritime capital of the world, the core area construction of Pudong towards an international shipping center, and the construction of a new western land-sea corridor, etc. Considering their respective geographical advantages, the maritime courts in various regions actively met the new needs of local maritime justice, formulated corresponding implementation opinions, and issued briefings and typical cases on the implementation of the national strategies including provisions of maritime judicial services to ensure high-standard opening-up, coordinated development of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region, the construction of the China (Shanghai) Pilot Free Trade Zone, the integrated development of the Yangtze River Delta and the high-quality development of the Yangtze River Economic Belt. Their various practical measures have achieved outstanding results.
In order to give full play to the important role of maritime trials in serving and safeguarding major national strategies and promoting the construction of a new development pattern, the Supreme People's Court (SPC) has deepened its top-level design and encouraged engagement with local governments with the aim of serving and safeguarding a high-standard opening-up and the construction of a strong maritime nation. From 2018 to 2021, it had issued a series of judicial documents including Opinions on Providing Judicial Services and Protection for Hainan's Comprehensively Deepening Reform and Opening-up, Opinions on Providing Judicial Services and Protection for the Construction of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macau Greater Bay Area, Opinions on the People's Courts to Further Provide Judicial Services and Protection for the Construction of the Belt and Road Initiative, Opinions on the People's Court to Provide Judicial Services and Protection for the Construction of the Lingang Special Area of the China (Shanghai) Pilot Free Trade Zone, Instruction Opinions on the People's Courts to Serve and Safeguard the Further Expansion of Opening-up, Opinions on Supporting and Safeguarding the Construction of Shenzhen into a Pilot Demonstration Area of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics, Opinions on the People's Courts' Provision of Judicial Services and Protection for the Construction of the Hainan Free Trade Port, Opinions on the People's Courts to Support and Safeguard the High-standard Reform and Opening-up of the Pudong New Area to Build a Pioneer Area for Socialist Modernization. With these documents, the Supreme People's Court has guided maritime courts at all levels to improve judicial efficiency, innovate trial mechanisms, strengthen team building, and give full play to the important role of maritime justice in safeguarding national maritime rights and interests, protecting the marine ecological environment, and promoting the development of the marine economy. In this way, they serve to provide judicial services and protection for the construction of the Hainan Free Trade Port, the enhancement of the international competitiveness of the port cluster at Pearl River Delta, the construction of Shanghai towards a global hub port, the integrated development of the Yangtze River Delta, the construction of Shenzhen towards the leading maritime capital of the world, the core area construction of Pudong towards an international shipping center, and the construction of a new western land-sea corridor, etc. Considering their respective geographical advantages, the maritime courts in various regions actively met the new needs of local maritime justice, formulated corresponding implementation opinions, and issued briefings and typical cases on the implementation of the national strategies including provisions of maritime judicial services to ensure high-standard opening-up, coordinated development of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region, the construction of the China (Shanghai) Pilot Free Trade Zone, the integrated development of the Yangtze River Delta and the high-quality development of the Yangtze River Economic Belt. Their various practical measures have achieved outstanding results.
(II) Exercising maritime judicial jurisdiction in accordance with the law and protecting national maritime rights and interests
Maritime courts in China exercised judicial jurisdiction in accordance with the law over the waters under China's jurisdiction to protect the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese and foreign parties on an equal footing, and safeguarded China’s maritime rights and interests. In May 2018, Xiamen Maritime Court public announced the judgment in the case of Chen and Zhan v. Arize Navigation Corporation in a dispute over liability for ship collision damage, and all parties were satisfied with the verdict. As the second case that occurred in the waters of the Diaoyu Islands accepted by the Maritime Court of China, it fully demonstrated that the people’s courts have consistently exercised effective judicial jurisdiction over the waters under China’s jurisdiction in accordance with the law. In October 2020, the SPC designated the Haikou Maritime Court as a pilot court with jurisdiction over maritime criminal cases to hear a case against a foreign fisherman called Van for his crime of illegally entered the territorial sea of China located in the South China Sea to fish for aquatic products and supplementary environmental public interest litigation in criminal proceedings. The Haikou Maritime Court delivered a public verdict on 3 March 2021, sentencing the defendant Van to a fixed-term of imprisonment and deportation for the crime of illegal fishing of aquatic products, confiscating the tools and illegal proceeds of the crime, and bearing the costs of ecological restoration and ecological assessment. Defendant Van accepted the judgment and waived his right to appeal. This was a maritime criminal case in which foreigners illegally entered South China Sea within China’s jurisdiction to fish for aquatic products. It is a typical case of China's maritime justice in strengthening the protection of the marine ecological environment, combating illegal and criminal marine activities, and exercising judicial jurisdiction in accordance with the law over the waters under China's jurisdiction, which highlighted the important role of maritime justice in safeguarding China's maritime rights, interests and security.
Maritime courts in China exercised judicial jurisdiction in accordance with the law over the waters under China's jurisdiction to protect the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese and foreign parties on an equal footing, and safeguarded China’s maritime rights and interests. In May 2018, Xiamen Maritime Court public announced the judgment in the case of Chen and Zhan v. Arize Navigation Corporation in a dispute over liability for ship collision damage, and all parties were satisfied with the verdict. As the second case that occurred in the waters of the Diaoyu Islands accepted by the Maritime Court of China, it fully demonstrated that the people’s courts have consistently exercised effective judicial jurisdiction over the waters under China’s jurisdiction in accordance with the law. In October 2020, the SPC designated the Haikou Maritime Court as a pilot court with jurisdiction over maritime criminal cases to hear a case against a foreign fisherman called Van for his crime of illegally entered the territorial sea of China located in the South China Sea to fish for aquatic products and supplementary environmental public interest litigation in criminal proceedings. The Haikou Maritime Court delivered a public verdict on 3 March 2021, sentencing the defendant Van to a fixed-term of imprisonment and deportation for the crime of illegal fishing of aquatic products, confiscating the tools and illegal proceeds of the crime, and bearing the costs of ecological restoration and ecological assessment. Defendant Van accepted the judgment and waived his right to appeal. This was a maritime criminal case in which foreigners illegally entered South China Sea within China’s jurisdiction to fish for aquatic products. It is a typical case of China's maritime justice in strengthening the protection of the marine ecological environment, combating illegal and criminal marine activities, and exercising judicial jurisdiction in accordance with the law over the waters under China's jurisdiction, which highlighted the important role of maritime justice in safeguarding China's maritime rights, interests and security.
Maritime courts innovated the mechanism and system for safeguarding maritime rights and interests, and gave full play to functional roles of the maritime adjudication. The Haikou Maritime Court issued the Working System for Maritime Circuit Courts and Island Trials to set up maritime circuit courts, and conducted maritime trials and promoted public awareness of rule of law. At the same time, an island trial site was established on Jinqing Island in Xisha while a regular office rotation was carried out on Yongxing Island where the Sansha division is located. Maritime courts strengthened maritime judicial jurisdiction in various forms over the waters under China's jurisdiction, demonstrating the attitude, responsibility, and commitment to firmly guard the maritime rights and interests of China.
(III) Strengthening judicial protection of marine environment to safeguard marine ecological civilization construction
The protection of marine natural resources and the ecological environment is the fundamental requirement and basic guarantee for accelerating the construction of a strong maritime country while realizing the harmonious coexistence of humans and the sea. Constantly increasing judicial protection of the marine environment and providing strong services and safeguards for promoting marine the ecology are urgent matters. As one of the important forces in marine ecological environment protection, maritime justice has been actively exploring and developing judicial protection practices of the marine ecological environment, and building a strong judicial defense line to protect the azure sea and blue sky.
Improving the Supporting System of Adjudicatory Rules. Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues Concerning the Trial of Cases of Compensation Disputes Arising from Marine Natural Resource and Eco-Environmental Damage, which came into effect on 15 January 2018, defined the nature and claimant for compensation in such litigation and perfected the general rules and alternative methods for loss assessment. The provisions played an important role in standardizing adjudicative criteria and comprehensively strengthening the judicial protection of the marine environment. Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues Concerning the Trial of Cases of Compensation Disputes Arising from Oil Pollution Damage of Ships, revised in 2020 clarified the jurisdiction, limitation of liability, defenses of insurers or financial guarantors, and the scope of compensation of such disputes, which provided a convincing basis for the protection of the marine environment and fully reflected the spirits of the international conventions to which China had acceded, such as the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage. The clear adjudicatory rules in maritime judicial practices have enriched and developed the system of judicial rules concerning the marine ecological environment. The Haikou Maritime Court heard the case of Hainan Lingao Yinghai Shipping Co., Ltd. v. the Fisheries Administration Detachment of Sansha City over an administrative penalty. With the proper application of relevant laws and judicial interpretations, the judgment provided equal judicial protection for the coral and tridacna in the appendix of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora to maintain the safety of the ecological environment of the sea area of Sansha. The Beihai Maritime Court heard the case of the Beihai Naizhi Marine Technology Co., Ltd. v. Ocean and Fishery Bureau of Beihai City over administrative penalties. The case clarified the subject of illegal reclamation, the yardstick of joint illegal activities, and the rules of how maritime administrative penalty discretion should be exercised, which was of positive significance for the safety of the national coastline and the marine ecological balance. The above two cases were selected into the 31st batch of guiding cases on biodiversity conservation of the SPC, which established the adjudication standards and methods for similar cases.
Improving the Supporting System of Adjudicatory Rules. Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues Concerning the Trial of Cases of Compensation Disputes Arising from Marine Natural Resource and Eco-Environmental Damage, which came into effect on 15 January 2018, defined the nature and claimant for compensation in such litigation and perfected the general rules and alternative methods for loss assessment. The provisions played an important role in standardizing adjudicative criteria and comprehensively strengthening the judicial protection of the marine environment. Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues Concerning the Trial of Cases of Compensation Disputes Arising from Oil Pollution Damage of Ships, revised in 2020 clarified the jurisdiction, limitation of liability, defenses of insurers or financial guarantors, and the scope of compensation of such disputes, which provided a convincing basis for the protection of the marine environment and fully reflected the spirits of the international conventions to which China had acceded, such as the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage. The clear adjudicatory rules in maritime judicial practices have enriched and developed the system of judicial rules concerning the marine ecological environment. The Haikou Maritime Court heard the case of Hainan Lingao Yinghai Shipping Co., Ltd. v. the Fisheries Administration Detachment of Sansha City over an administrative penalty. With the proper application of relevant laws and judicial interpretations, the judgment provided equal judicial protection for the coral and tridacna in the appendix of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora to maintain the safety of the ecological environment of the sea area of Sansha. The Beihai Maritime Court heard the case of the Beihai Naizhi Marine Technology Co., Ltd. v. Ocean and Fishery Bureau of Beihai City over administrative penalties. The case clarified the subject of illegal reclamation, the yardstick of joint illegal activities, and the rules of how maritime administrative penalty discretion should be exercised, which was of positive significance for the safety of the national coastline and the marine ecological balance. The above two cases were selected into the 31st batch of guiding cases on biodiversity conservation of the SPC, which established the adjudication standards and methods for similar cases.
Carrying out professional trial practices in an orderly manner. The maritime courts at three levels nationwide have continuously strengthened the specialized maritime adjudicative mechanism to ensure that the trial of cases is of high quality, and to enhance judicial protection of the marine environment. In the retrial of the case of disputed liability for ship pollution damage among the Shanghai Salvage Bureau of the Ministry of Transport and Provence Shipowner 2008-1 Ltd, CMA CGM SA, and Rockwell Shipping Limited, the SPC clarified the boundary between relevant domestic laws and international treaties, and elaborated upon the compensation for oil pollution damage of the party of the non-leaking ship in the collision, as well as the relevant limitation of liability and the allocation rules of funds for the limitation of liability. In this case, the marine environmental interests of the sovereign state and the commercial interests of shipping operators have been reasonably balanced, and the professionalism of China’s judicial protection of marine ecology has been demonstrated. In the case of a dispute over the liability for marine pollution damage caused by the fuel leakage of the Panamanian Vessel APL LOS ANGELES heard by the Xiamen Maritime Court, experts in ecological environmental technology were invited to the mediation to facilitate the reaching of an agreement between the parties concerned, and the adjudication of the case and the contents of the mediation agreement were publicly available to ensure the public’s participation and supervision in the country’s marine environmental governance. The Haikou Maritime Court heard the first public interest litigation case of maritime administration started by the procuratorial organ. The court ordered the departments of marine environment supervision and administration to perform their duties within a time limit, fulfilling its duty to urge the administrative departments to perform effectively in accordance with the law to protect marine natural resources and the ecological environment. The Haikou Maritime Court issued the White Paper on the Trials of Marine Environmental and Resource Cases (2018-2020), which summed up the experience of trials of marine environmental resources cases, summarized relevant legal issues and solutions, and built a brand of marine environment and resource protection. The Shanghai Maritime Court has appointed expert jurors and specially invited consultants, set up a category of professional appraisal institutions, and established a professional trial team for marine environmental protection to continuously perfect the specialized maritime adjudicative mechanism. These professional trial practices have laid a solid foundation for ensuring the high standard, high quality, and efficiency of trials concerning the marine environment.
Carrying out professional trial practices in an orderly manner. The maritime courts at three levels nationwide have continuously strengthened the specialized maritime adjudicative mechanism to ensure that the trial of cases is of high quality, and to enhance judicial protection of the marine environment. In the retrial of the case of disputed liability for ship pollution damage among the Shanghai Salvage Bureau of the Ministry of Transport and Provence Shipowner 2008-1 Ltd, CMA CGM SA, and Rockwell Shipping Limited, the SPC clarified the boundary between relevant domestic laws and international treaties, and elaborated upon the compensation for oil pollution damage of the party of the non-leaking ship in the collision, as well as the relevant limitation of liability and the allocation rules of funds for the limitation of liability. In this case, the marine environmental interests of the sovereign state and the commercial interests of shipping operators have been reasonably balanced, and the professionalism of China’s judicial protection of marine ecology has been demonstrated. In the case of a dispute over the liability for marine pollution damage caused by the fuel leakage of the Panamanian Vessel APL LOS ANGELES heard by the Xiamen Maritime Court, experts in ecological environmental technology were invited to the mediation to facilitate the reaching of an agreement between the parties concerned, and the adjudication of the case and the contents of the mediation agreement were publicly available to ensure the public’s participation and supervision in the country’s marine environmental governance. The Haikou Maritime Court heard the first public interest litigation case of maritime administration started by the procuratorial organ. The court ordered the departments of marine environment supervision and administration to perform their duties within a time limit, fulfilling its duty to urge the administrative departments to perform effectively in accordance with the law to protect marine natural resources and the ecological environment. The Haikou Maritime Court issued the White Paper on the Trials of Marine Environmental and Resource Cases (2018-2020), which summed up the experience of trials of marine environmental resources cases, summarized relevant legal issues and solutions, and built a brand of marine environment and resource protection. The Shanghai Maritime Court has appointed expert jurors and specially invited consultants, set up a category of professional appraisal institutions, and established a professional trial team for marine environmental protection to continuously perfect the specialized maritime adjudicative mechanism. These professional trial practices have laid a solid foundation for ensuring the high standard, high quality, and efficiency of trials concerning the marine environment.
Establishing an efficient cooperation mechanism of judicial protection. The maritime courts firmly adhered to the concept of integrated development of both the ecological environment and the economy, and worked together to present a high-level model of judicial cooperation in terms of marine ecology. The Maritime Courts in Guangzhou, Haikou, and Beihai jointly built a judicial cooperation platform for marine environmental protection and shared the benefits. They created a alliance from the Beibu Gulf to the Qiongzhou Strait for marine environmental resource protection, and successfully handled public interest litigation cases of the marine environment across sea waters with the help of the mode of online mediation and offline collaboration. The Maritime Courts in Tianjin, Dalian, and Qingdao signed a framework agreement, established a mechanism for joint meetings, and carried out coordination and in-depth cooperation in terms of the judicial protection of the ecological environment of the Bohai Sea. All the maritime courts have actively functioned in the multi-departmental consultation mechanism under the leadership of the local party committee or the local government and strengthened coordination and cooperation with the procuratorial organ, public security, and judicial administrative organs. The Beihai Maritime Court has established a mechanism of cooperation, communication, negotiation, and information sharing with the Maritime Safety Administration, the Coast Guard, and the Oceanic Administration to jointly safeguard the marine ecological environment and the safety of the Beibu Gulf.
(IV) Deeply implementing the strategy of high-quality maritime trials and ensuring the high-quality development of the marine economy
Bearing the big picture of overall economic and social development in mind, the courts at the three levels nationwide have been consistently promoting the opening-up and ocean development and utilization, and facilitating foreign trade, the shipping economy and the construction of international and regional shipping centers. They have optimized the allocation of trial resources and strengthened the sense of high-quality trials to enhance the credibility and influence of maritime trials and expand the breadth and depth of their services for the development of the marine economy.
Maintaining the order of shipping and trade. Firstly, the courts have handled various maritime cases involving cargo transportation, integrated logistics, and ship collisions in accordance with the law to ensure the safety of shipping, maintain the stability of the international logistics supply chain, guide the shipping market to operate orderly and healthily under the rules, and serve the development of the shipping economy. The Xiamen Maritime Court, in the case of the dispute over the liability for maritime property damage between Fujian Yuancheng Soybean Co., Ltd. and Revival Shipping Co., Ltd. , clarified that it is not the carrier’s obligation to provide the information of cargo grade and quality index while filling the bill of lading, which provided guidance for shipping practices, maintained the liquidity of bills of lading in international trade, and ensured transaction security and financial integration. The Ningbo Maritime Court, in the case of Jiang and Lin’s ship collision damage liability dispute, accurately interpreted the relationship between the unlicensed driving of the crew and the ship owner’s loss of the limitation of liability for maritime compensation, which had a positive effect on further standardizing the shipping order and ensuring the safety of shipping. The Wuhan Maritime Court heard the case of a collision between the Institute of Hydrobiology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and Runhang Shipping Co., Ltd., and decided that the owner and operator of the ship took joint and several liability for the damage to the aquaculture facilities and rare fish species. The judgment played an active role in strengthening the operation and management of ships, maintaining the shipping order of the Yangtze River, and promoting the green and sustainable development of the Yangtze River Economic Belt. The Dalian Maritime Court flexibly took advantage of the maritime injunction to help hundreds of cold chain importing companies to solve customs clearance problems, which accelerated the circulation of stranded containers and cargoes during COVID-19 pandemic, minimized the losses of both the shippers and the carriers, facilitated the smooth implementation of a series of contracts concerning maritime cargo transportation, international trade, production and processing, and provided a strong boost for enterprises to resume operations under COVID-19 pandemic. Secondly, the courts strengthened the trial of cases involving the advanced ship manufacturing industry and the modern service industry, such as ship repair and construction, shipping financing, shipping insurance, etc., to promote the active growth of the maritime financial industry, speed up the transformation and upgrading of the shipbuilding industry, expand the shipping service industry chain, and help create a favorable environment for shipping development. The Shanghai Maritime Court heard the case of dispute over the shipbuilding contract between Qidong Shunfeng Ocean Fishery Co., Ltd and Shanghai Zhenhua Heavy Industries Qidong Marine Engineering Co., Ltd. Based on the performance of the contract of the two parties, the court accurately determined the liability for breach of contract, which, in the policy context of the country’s strong support for pelagic fisheries, might serve as a reference for properly resolving disputes over similar ship building contracts caused by long performance periods, frequent changes, and high amounts of money involved, and vigorously supporting the regulated development of pelagic fisheries. The Xiamen Maritime Court concluded the case of Xiamen Shipbuilding Industry Co., Ltd. applying for the realization of rights for maritime security, which recorded the largest value of subject matter (RMB 140 million) of the year. The Tianjin Maritime Court issued the White Paper on Trial of Ship Financial Leasing Cases and typical cases in 2018, which provided detailed interpretations for relevant legal issues and risk warnings, and ensured the reform and innovation of maritime finance. In May 2021, the Shanghai Maritime Court issued the Report on Trials Involving the Shipbuilding Industry in both Chinese and English, which reviewed relevant work initiatives, suggestions for solving problems and typical cases, and fully reflected the role of maritime justice in promoting the sustainable and healthy development of the shipbuilding industry and enhancing its international competitiveness.
Maintaining the order of shipping and trade. Firstly, the courts have handled various maritime cases involving cargo transportation, integrated logistics, and ship collisions in accordance with the law to ensure the safety of shipping, maintain the stability of the international logistics supply chain, guide the shipping market to operate orderly and healthily under the rules, and serve the development of the shipping economy. The Xiamen Maritime Court, in the case of the dispute over the liability for maritime property damage between Fujian Yuancheng Soybean Co., Ltd. and Revival Shipping Co., Ltd. , clarified that it is not the carrier’s obligation to provide the information of cargo grade and quality index while filling the bill of lading, which provided guidance for shipping practices, maintained the liquidity of bills of lading in international trade, and ensured transaction security and financial integration. The Ningbo Maritime Court, in the case of Jiang and Lin’s ship collision damage liability dispute, accurately interpreted the relationship between the unlicensed driving of the crew and the ship owner’s loss of the limitation of liability for maritime compensation, which had a positive effect on further standardizing the shipping order and ensuring the safety of shipping. The Wuhan Maritime Court heard the case of a collision between the Institute of Hydrobiology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and Runhang Shipping Co., Ltd., and decided that the owner and operator of the ship took joint and several liability for the damage to the aquaculture facilities and rare fish species. The judgment played an active role in strengthening the operation and management of ships, maintaining the shipping order of the Yangtze River, and promoting the green and sustainable development of the Yangtze River Economic Belt. The Dalian Maritime Court flexibly took advantage of the maritime injunction to help hundreds of cold chain importing companies to solve customs clearance problems, which accelerated the circulation of stranded containers and cargoes during COVID-19 pandemic, minimized the losses of both the shippers and the carriers, facilitated the smooth implementation of a series of contracts concerning maritime cargo transportation, international trade, production and processing, and provided a strong boost for enterprises to resume operations under COVID-19 pandemic. Secondly, the courts strengthened the trial of cases involving the advanced ship manufacturing industry and the modern service industry, such as ship repair and construction, shipping financing, shipping insurance, etc., to promote the active growth of the maritime financial industry, speed up the transformation and upgrading of the shipbuilding industry, expand the shipping service industry chain, and help create a favorable environment for shipping development. The Shanghai Maritime Court heard the case of dispute over the shipbuilding contract between Qidong Shunfeng Ocean Fishery Co., Ltd and Shanghai Zhenhua Heavy Industries Qidong Marine Engineering Co., Ltd. Based on the performance of the contract of the two parties, the court accurately determined the liability for breach of contract, which, in the policy context of the country’s strong support for pelagic fisheries, might serve as a reference for properly resolving disputes over similar ship building contracts caused by long performance periods, frequent changes, and high amounts of money involved, and vigorously supporting the regulated development of pelagic fisheries. The Xiamen Maritime Court concluded the case of Xiamen Shipbuilding Industry Co., Ltd. applying for the realization of rights for maritime security, which recorded the largest value of subject matter (RMB 140 million) of the year. The Tianjin Maritime Court issued the White Paper on Trial of Ship Financial Leasing Cases and typical cases in 2018, which provided detailed interpretations for relevant legal issues and risk warnings, and ensured the reform and innovation of maritime finance. In May 2021, the Shanghai Maritime Court issued the Report on Trials Involving the Shipbuilding Industry in both Chinese and English, which reviewed relevant work initiatives, suggestions for solving problems and typical cases, and fully reflected the role of maritime justice in promoting the sustainable and healthy development of the shipbuilding industry and enhancing its international competitiveness.
Promoting the development of the marine economy. Firstly, the maritime courts have heard disputes over port operations, wharf construction, and port dredging in accordance with the law to assist in the transformation and upgrading of coastal ports, promote the optimization and integration of port resources, and serve and guarantee the construction of gateway ports. The Beihai Maritime Court heard the case of the construction contract dispute between CCCC-Tianjin Dredging Co., Ltd. and Fangcheng Port Group Co., Ltd., in which it took the interests and demands of various parties involved into full consideration, and determined the liability of all parties according to the law. All of the parties were satisfied with the first instance judgment. This case fully reflected the support of maritime trials for the construction of new ports and the shipping industry and marine development, and thus the construction of the marine industry system could also be well advanced. Maritime courts, including the Nanjing Maritime Court and the Tianjin Maritime Court, have paid close attention to the development of new technologies in the field of ports and shipping, and have issued timely safeguard measures for the construction of green ports and smart ports to provide judicial assistance for the construction of world-class ports. The Ningbo Maritime Court issued the Report on the Trial of Disputes in the Construction of Marine Projects such as Ports and Wharves in 2020. It has put forward targeted legal suggestions based on the features of the disputes to provide judicial guarantees for deepening the implementation of supply-side structural reforms in the fields of sea and port and carrying out the development strategy of “One body -Two wing- Multiple connections” for the ports in Zhejiang Province. Secondly, the courts have properly heard cases involving marine engineering, cruise tourism, and marine development and utilization, and given full play to the functions of maritime justice in resolving conflicts and disputes regarding the marine economy and promoting the operation of marine economic elements, promoting scientific marine development and utilization, and providing judicial support for the development of competitive marine industries and emerging industries. The Xiamen Maritime Court successfully concluded a number of cases concerning marine engineering, novel marine industries and business forms, represented by the disputes over compensation for the damage to aquaculture caused by the construction of an offshore wind farm with a total investment of nearly RMB 5 billion as such providing strong judicial support for the innovation of marine engineering equipment and the development of the marine economy. The Qingdao Maritime Court and the Shandong Provincial Higher People’s Court tried the case of a construction contract dispute concerning Shenlan No.1, China’s first full-submersible deep-sea aquaculture equipment. The courts reasonably divided the responsibilities of the two parties and determined the amount of loss. They took into account of not only the legitimate rights and interests of the investors, but also the innovation enthusiasm of R&D and construction institutions, and actively explored the post-judgment mediation model to enable both parties to reach a settlement based on the judgment and voluntarily fulfilled the performance. It became a typical case of a new type, which guaranteed the success of domestic deep-sea fishery scale aquaculture and helped to improve the scale and technologies of China’s marine cage aquaculture. The Shanghai Maritime Court heard the case of a personal injury liability dispute at sea between Yang and British Carnival Cruise and made a judgment based on the accurate application of the Athens Convention Relating To The Carriage Of Passengers And Their luggage By Sea, 1974, to which China has acceded, which provided judicial guidance for building the demonstration area of cruise tourism development and promoting the construction and further upgrading of the soft power of the Shanghai International Shipping Center. After the judgment, the defendant not only paid compensation in a timely manner, but also took active improvement measures. The case was included in the maritime caselaw database of the National University of Singapore.
Promoting the development of the marine economy. Firstly, the maritime courts have heard disputes over port operations, wharf construction, and port dredging in accordance with the law to assist in the transformation and upgrading of coastal ports, promote the optimization and integration of port resources, and serve and guarantee the construction of gateway ports. The Beihai Maritime Court heard the case of the construction contract dispute between CCCC-Tianjin Dredging Co., Ltd. and Fangcheng Port Group Co., Ltd., in which it took the interests and demands of various parties involved into full consideration, and determined the liability of all parties according to the law. All of the parties were satisfied with the first instance judgment. This case fully reflected the support of maritime trials for the construction of new ports and the shipping industry and marine development, and thus the construction of the marine industry system could also be well advanced. Maritime courts, including the Nanjing Maritime Court and the Tianjin Maritime Court, have paid close attention to the development of new technologies in the field of ports and shipping, and have issued timely safeguard measures for the construction of green ports and smart ports to provide judicial assistance for the construction of world-class ports. The Ningbo Maritime Court issued the Report on the Trial of Disputes in the Construction of Marine Projects such as Ports and Wharves in 2020. It has put forward targeted legal suggestions based on the features of the disputes to provide judicial guarantees for deepening the implementation of supply-side structural reforms in the fields of sea and port and carrying out the development strategy of “One body -Two wing- Multiple connections” for the ports in Zhejiang Province. Secondly, the courts have properly heard cases involving marine engineering, cruise tourism, and marine development and utilization, and given full play to the functions of maritime justice in resolving conflicts and disputes regarding the marine economy and promoting the operation of marine economic elements, promoting scientific marine development and utilization, and providing judicial support for the development of competitive marine industries and emerging industries. The Xiamen Maritime Court successfully concluded a number of cases concerning marine engineering, novel marine industries and business forms, represented by the disputes over compensation for the damage to aquaculture caused by the construction of an offshore wind farm with a total investment of nearly RMB 5 billion as such providing strong judicial support for the innovation of marine engineering equipment and the development of the marine economy. The Qingdao Maritime Court and the Shandong Provincial Higher People’s Court tried the case of a construction contract dispute concerning Shenlan No.1, China’s first full-submersible deep-sea aquaculture equipment. The courts reasonably divided the responsibilities of the two parties and determined the amount of loss. They took into account of not only the legitimate rights and interests of the investors, but also the innovation enthusiasm of R&D and construction institutions, and actively explored the post-judgment mediation model to enable both parties to reach a settlement based on the judgment and voluntarily fulfilled the performance. It became a typical case of a new type, which guaranteed the success of domestic deep-sea fishery scale aquaculture and helped to improve the scale and technologies of China’s marine cage aquaculture. The Shanghai Maritime Court heard the case of a personal injury liability dispute at sea between Yang and British Carnival Cruise and made a judgment based on the accurate application of the Athens Convention Relating To The Carriage Of Passengers And Their luggage By Sea, 1974, to which China has acceded, which provided judicial guidance for building the demonstration area of cruise tourism development and promoting the construction and further upgrading of the soft power of the Shanghai International Shipping Center. After the judgment, the defendant not only paid compensation in a timely manner, but also took active improvement measures. The case was included in the maritime caselaw database of the National University of Singapore.
Creating a market-oriented international business environment under the rule of law – The courts participating in maritime adjudication nationwide exercise jurisdiction in accordance with law, perform obligations under international treaties, uphold the principle of party autonomy, properly determine which law shall be applied in the event of disputes, deal with foreign-related maritime cases and cases involving Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan elements, impartially protect the legitimate rights and interests of the parties concerned regardless of nationality, and continuously improve the international credibility and influence of maritime trials. China’s maritime courts play an important role as guardian in optimizing the business environment and serving high-level opening up. The Xiamen Maritime Court ruled that the Asymmetric Jurisdiction Clause was valid in the case of a dispute over bareboat charter and guarantee between Good Vantage Shipping Limited and the Shi. The Court’s respect for party autonomy is in line with the development trend and practical needs of international commercial and maritime dispute settlement. In the dispute over shipbuilding contract between Norwegian shipowner BARGES AS and Nanjing Yichun Shipbuilding Co., Ltd., both parties agreed to submit the dispute to the Nanjing Maritime Court for adjudication with Chinese law to apply .The dispute was originally agreed to be arbitrated in London and governed by English law. It took the Nanjing Maritime Court only 27 days to settle the six-year long dispute, becoming a vivid demonstration of the efficiency of China’s maritime trial. In the case concerning the arrest of M/V Nerissa, the foreign party gave up right to arbitration in London and reached a settlement agreement thanks to the efforts of the Qingdao Maritime Court. The new shipowner renamed the vessel “Respect” to pay tribute to China’s maritime justice. The Shanghai Maritime Court applied English case law to the dispute over a shipbuilding commission contract between Winship Maritime Inc. and China Shipping Industry Co., Ltd and facilitated a settlement, which provided a model for foreign commercial and maritime trials in the ascertainment and application of foreign case law. The case was included in the ChineseMaritimeandCommercialLawReports published by well-known UK publisher INFORMA PLC as well as its database. In the case of a dispute arising from the collision of DPRK vessel MV TU RU BONG 3 and ROK vessel HIGHNY in a sea area not under the jurisdiction of China, both parties agreed that the dispute should be handled by the Shanghai Maritime Court with Chinese law to apply. In this case, neither the parties nor the accident concerned had any connection with China. Their decision to file lawsuits in the Chinese Maritime Court reflects international recognition and trust of the quality of China’s maritime trials and highlights that maritime trial serves China’s opening-up strategy and helps create a business environment that is stable, fair, transparent, and predictable.
Creating a market-oriented international business environment under the rule of law – The courts participating in maritime adjudication nationwide exercise jurisdiction in accordance with law, perform obligations under international treaties, uphold the principle of party autonomy, properly determine which law shall be applied in the event of disputes, deal with foreign-related maritime cases and cases involving Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan elements, impartially protect the legitimate rights and interests of the parties concerned regardless of nationality, and continuously improve the international credibility and influence of maritime trials. China’s maritime courts play an important role as guardian in optimizing the business environment and serving high-level opening up. The Xiamen Maritime Court ruled that the Asymmetric Jurisdiction Clause was valid in the case of a dispute over bareboat charter and guarantee between Good Vantage Shipping Limited and the Shi. The Court’s respect for party autonomy is in line with the development trend and practical needs of international commercial and maritime dispute settlement. In the dispute over shipbuilding contract between Norwegian shipowner BARGES AS and Nanjing Yichun Shipbuilding Co., Ltd., both parties agreed to submit the dispute to the Nanjing Maritime Court for adjudication with Chinese law to apply .The dispute was originally agreed to be arbitrated in London and governed by English law. It took the Nanjing Maritime Court only 27 days to settle the six-year long dispute, becoming a vivid demonstration of the efficiency of China’s maritime trial. In the case concerning the arrest of M/V Nerissa, the foreign party gave up right to arbitration in London and reached a settlement agreement thanks to the efforts of the Qingdao Maritime Court. The new shipowner renamed the vessel “Respect” to pay tribute to China’s maritime justice. The Shanghai Maritime Court applied English case law to the dispute over a shipbuilding commission contract between Winship Maritime Inc. and China Shipping Industry Co., Ltd and facilitated a settlement, which provided a model for foreign commercial and maritime trials in the ascertainment and application of foreign case law. The case was included in the ChineseMaritimeandCommercialLawReports published by well-known UK publisher INFORMA PLC as well as its database. In the case of a dispute arising from the collision of DPRK vessel MV TU RU BONG 3 and ROK vessel HIGHNY in a sea area not under the jurisdiction of China, both parties agreed that the dispute should be handled by the Shanghai Maritime Court with Chinese law to apply. In this case, neither the parties nor the accident concerned had any connection with China. Their decision to file lawsuits in the Chinese Maritime Court reflects international recognition and trust of the quality of China’s maritime trials and highlights that maritime trial serves China’s opening-up strategy and helps create a business environment that is stable, fair, transparent, and predictable.
(V) Protecting the legitimate rights and interests of crew members to promote the healthy and stable development of the shipping industry
Protecting the legitimate rights and interests of crew members is of great significance to marine traffic safety and the healthy and stable development of the shipping industry. In 2020, the SPC published the Judicial Interpretation Regarding the Trial of Crew Members Related Cases, which provides guidance on issues in the settlement of crew disputes including differentiating legal relationship between labor contracts, service contracts, and agency contracts and their respective different solutions, protection of maritime liens, and the right of crew members to salaries. On June 25, the “Day of the Seafarer”, the SPC published eight typical cases concerning the protection of interests of crew members in maritime disputes, covering issues including the specific determination of maritime liens, the elimination of an urban-rural gap in compensation for personal injuries, and the maritime liens on advance disbursement by a third party. This embodies the Socialist core value of integrity and good faith, and serves as a supplement to the incomplete laws and regulations, showing that maritime trials play an important role in protecting the legitimate rights of crew members, maintaining the order of the shipping industry, and promoting the high-quality and healthy development of the maritime service industry.
China’s maritime courts have taken the various innovative measures to protect the legitimate interests and rights of crew members. Firstly, a fast trial procedure to resolve disputes concerning personal injuries and labor disputes has been developed to provide a fast track for less complicated cases and to accelerate the fulfillment of crew members’ legitimate interests and rights. Secondly, a pre-litigation dispute settlement mechanism featuring collaboration with government agencies has been developed to promote efficient resolution. Thirdly, more financial support has been provided to help the crew members impoverished by disputes arising during COVID-19 pandemic prevention and control to allow them receive legal aid to make ends meet. Fourthly, more humanitarian assistance has been provided for stranded foreign crew members. As is shown in the case concerning Liberian M.V. “Sam lion” adjudicated by the Qingdao Maritime Court, and the case concerning Greece M.V. Angelic Power adjudicated by the Guangzhou Maritime Court, China’s maritime courts have done a good job in the repatriation of foreign crew members during the lawful arrest and auction of foreign vessels, winning recognition from foreign diplomatic authorities and foreign parties concerned. This provides a China’s model for courts worldwide to repatriate foreign crew members during COVID-19 pandemic, representing China’s wisdom to help promote work and the resumption of production by shipping companies. Fifthly, the Dalian, Xiamen and other Maritime Courts have specifically issued special reports on the trial of disputes involving crew members, reporting the basic situation, work highlights, trial views and opinions and suggestions, extending maritime judicial services, and continuously improving crew members' sense of happiness, security and gain, and promoting the sound development of the shipping industry.
III. Promoting the Establishment of the International Maritime Court Center through Continuous Optimization of the Trial Mechanism and Capacity Building
With the implementation of the Belt and Road Initiative, the international shipping center continues to transfer to the Asia Pacific region and China. Maritime justice constitutes an important part of the soft power of an international shipping center. The continuous growth of China's shipping trade has provided more impetus for maritime trial development. It has become an urgent practical need and a necessary path to enhance the international influence of China’s maritime justice.
(I) Optimizing the maritime legal mechanism to provide institutional guarantees for maritime trials
With the development of the shipping trade and the amendment of relevant laws, many problems have arisen during the implementation of the Maritime Law of the People’s Republic of China and the Special Maritime Procedures Law of the People’s Republic of China. It is thus imperative to improve and optimize the maritime legal framework with distinct features and rational practicability. In September 2018, the amendment of the Maritime Law was listed among the legislative projects announced by the Standing Committee of the 13th National People’s Congress. The amendment was led by the Ministry of Transport, and the SPC was deeply involved, calling on experienced maritime judges across China to engage in discussions and contribute judicial advice to the revision based on maritime trial practices. In July 2019, to optimize the maritime litigation system with Chinese characteristics and speed up efforts to build an international maritime judicial center, the SPC set up a working group to explore the necessity and feasibility of amending the Special Maritime Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China. In November 2021, after considering various opinions, the SPC submitted the Report on Proposed Amendments to the Special Maritime Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China to the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress, which provided specific amendment suggestions, promoting the incorporation of the amendments into China’s legislative plan. Highly praised by the National People’s Congress Legislative Affairs Commission, the report reflects SPC’s achievements in reviewing the judicial practice of maritime litigation in the past three decades, as well as its determination to establish China’s maritime procedure law as an international model and promote China’s advanced maritime legislative and judicial practices to the world.
In February 2019, the case involving a dispute over contracts of goods transportation in sea between Zhejiang Longda Stainless Steel Co., Ltd and A.P. Moller-Maersk A/S, the case involving a dispute over the salvage fees of Archangelos Gabriel owned by Archangelos Investments, and the case in which ASTK CO., LTD. applied for the constitution of a limitation fund for maritime claims, which were all decided by the SPC, were selected by the SPC as the 21st batch of guiding cases. In December 2019, the case filed by 79 fishermen including Lv against Shanhaiguan Shipbuilding Industry Co., Ltd. was selected by the SPC as the 24th batch of guiding cases. Maritime guiding cases deduce the applicable rules with general significance and represent a positive response to recurring yet still controversial legal issues in maritime judicial practice, providing specific and clear guidance for the adjudication of similar cases.
In June 2020, the SPC issued the Guiding Opinions (III) on Several Issues concerning the Proper Trial of Civil Cases Related to the COVID-19 pandemic (the “Opinions”). The Opinions provide guidance on how to deal with COVID-19 related civil cases concerning issues including shipping contracts and shipbuilding and crew member disputes to facilitate a settlement between the parties concerned. The Opinions are included in the Case Law on UNCITRAL Texts. In December 2021, the SPC issued the Conference Summary on the 2021 National Symposium on Foreign-Related Commercial and Maritime Trial Work, which provides guidance for maritime cases concerning shipping contracts, maritime property rights, judicial review of arbitration cases, service in foreign-related cases, and the application of law, etc., serving as important guidelines for national maritime trials. Between 2018 and 2021, the SPC had released 41 typical cases in total, fully demonstrating the important role of maritime trials in improving maritime judicial mindset, unifying trial standards, and improving litigation services. This will help optimize the trial rules and improve the influence and credibility of maritime trials.
(II) Innovating working mechanisms to improve the maritime trial system
Continuous efforts have been made to optimize the maritime judicial landscape. To serve the development of the Yangtze River Economic Belt and the integrated development of the Yangtze River Delta region and meet diversified public needs for judicial services, China has made significant adjustments to maritime judicial resources. In 2019, the Nanjing Maritime Court was established. To provide more convenient litigation services, the Wuhan Maritime Court set up the Wuhu Division, the Shanghai Maritime Court set up the Changxing Island Division, and the Ningbo Maritime Court set up the Ningbo Pilot Free Trade Zone Division. The establishment of the Hangzhou Division is under preparation. The divisions of the maritime courts were integrated into the international and regional shipping centers, pilot free trade zones, blue economic zones, and industrial parks in their locality, earning high praise from local authorities and government organs. Currently, considering that geographical scope of the jurisdiction of maritime courts is of a great length and breadth, 11 maritime courts in China have established 42 divisions and multiple circuit detachment to provide better service support for maritime trials and to provide greater convenience for the parties.
The trial mechanism for maritime administrative litigation matures more. The mechanism supports and supervises maritime administrative organs to perform their duties in accordance with law, promotes unified standards of administration and law enforcement, and protects the legitimate interests and rights of the parties concerned, playing an important role in optimizing the legal environment, the business environment, and the ecological environment of maritime industry. The case of a dispute over an administrative penalty imposed on a Sanwu ship（ships without ship name and number, ship certificate and port of registration）adjudicated by the Ningbo Maritime Court reflected that maritime judicial institutions provided strong support and effective supervision to help maintain the shipping order, and to protect personal safety, properties, and the marine environment. In the case filed by Fujian Quanzhou Haisi Vessel Assessment Consulting Co., Ltd. against Ocean and Fishery Bureau of Fuding City,the Xiamen Maritime Court entered a judgment to confirm the illegality of the administrative act of the Ocean and Fishery Bureau of Fuding City for abuse of administrative power and hampering of competition. The case set a good example for the handling of administrative offenses such as abuse of power, playing an important role in urging maritime authorities to exercise administrative power in accordance with law and promoting a sound market environment that allows transparent and fair competition. In the case of a dispute over an administrative penalty between Tianjin Zhizhen Chemical Engineering Technological Development Co., Ltd. and Beijiang Maritime Safety Administration and the Tianjin Maritime Safety Administration, the Tianjin Maritime Court set a good example to regulate the management and transport of hazardous chemicals. The maritime courts across China have made proactive efforts to communicate and coordinate with administrative organs, and the mechanism featuring the collaboration between maritime courts and administrative organs continues to improve. The Ningbo Maritime Court joined hands with the Department of Justice of Zhejiang Province to set up the Zhejiang Maritime Mediation Center for Administrative Disputes, reflecting remarkable progress in the substantial settlement of maritime administrative disputes. Maritime courts including the Dalian Maritime Court, the Tianjin Maritime Court, the Xiamen Maritime Court, and the Ningbo Maritime Court released white papers on maritime trials of administrative cases and typical cases and provided sound advice to help strengthen law-based administration from the perspectives of justice.
The trial mechanism for maritime administrative litigation matures more. The mechanism supports and supervises maritime administrative organs to perform their duties in accordance with law, promotes unified standards of administration and law enforcement, and protects the legitimate interests and rights of the parties concerned, playing an important role in optimizing the legal environment, the business environment, and the ecological environment of maritime industry. The case of a dispute over an administrative penalty imposed on a Sanwu ship（ships without ship name and number, ship certificate and port of registration）adjudicated by the Ningbo Maritime Court reflected that maritime judicial institutions provided strong support and effective supervision to help maintain the shipping order, and to protect personal safety, properties, and the marine environment. In the case filed by Fujian Quanzhou Haisi Vessel Assessment Consulting Co., Ltd. against Ocean and Fishery Bureau of Fuding City,the Xiamen Maritime Court entered a judgment to confirm the illegality of the administrative act of the Ocean and Fishery Bureau of Fuding City for abuse of administrative power and hampering of competition. The case set a good example for the handling of administrative offenses such as abuse of power, playing an important role in urging maritime authorities to exercise administrative power in accordance with law and promoting a sound market environment that allows transparent and fair competition. In the case of a dispute over an administrative penalty between Tianjin Zhizhen Chemical Engineering Technological Development Co., Ltd. and Beijiang Maritime Safety Administration and the Tianjin Maritime Safety Administration, the Tianjin Maritime Court set a good example to regulate the management and transport of hazardous chemicals. The maritime courts across China have made proactive efforts to communicate and coordinate with administrative organs, and the mechanism featuring the collaboration between maritime courts and administrative organs continues to improve. The Ningbo Maritime Court joined hands with the Department of Justice of Zhejiang Province to set up the Zhejiang Maritime Mediation Center for Administrative Disputes, reflecting remarkable progress in the substantial settlement of maritime administrative disputes. Maritime courts including the Dalian Maritime Court, the Tianjin Maritime Court, the Xiamen Maritime Court, and the Ningbo Maritime Court released white papers on maritime trials of administrative cases and typical cases and provided sound advice to help strengthen law-based administration from the perspectives of justice.
Making steady progress to set up pilot courts for maritime criminal cases. The SPC has steadily promoted the establishment of pilot maritime courts to exercise jurisdiction over maritime criminal cases. Following the designation of the Ningbo Maritime Court to serve as a pilot court to exercise jurisdiction over maritime criminal cases in February 2017, the SPC also designated the Haikou Maritime Court to accept two cases in which the defendants committed the crime of illegal fishing of aquatic products, and authorized the Higher People's Court of Hainan Province to designate the Haikou Maritime Court to serve as a pilot court to exercise jurisdiction over specific types of maritime criminal cases. As pilot courts with jurisdiction over maritime criminal cases, the Ningbo and Haikou Maritime Courts have been actively exploring a working mechanism with the investigation and public prosecution authorities to align the procedures of maritime criminal cases. The Higher People's Court of Hainan Province and the People's Procuratorate of Hainan Province jointly issued the Opinions on Establishingthe Working Mechanism for Designated Jurisdiction of Individual Maritime Criminal Cases (For Trial Implementation), which created standards for procedures regarding the transfer and prosecution of maritime criminal cases. The Ningbo Maritime Court and the People's Procuratorate of Zhoushan City signed the Summary of Strengthening Coordination and Cooperation to Promote High-quality Development of Maritime Trial and Marine Prosecution, and continued to strengthen cooperation and consultation and explore relevant working mechanisms with the investigation and public prosecution authorities, and other relevant government bodies with the support of the Higher people's Court of Zhejiang Province.
(III) Strengthening the building of the litigation service system and building a preferred forum for resolving maritime disputes
Improving judicial services. On 30 August 2019, maritime courts took the lead in achieving cross-regional case filings, allowing the parties to go through the filing procedures of all maritime courts at any maritime court across the country. Maritime courts across the country have also successively provided litigation services such as cross-regional material transfers, file retrieval and review, and document collection, and offered Chinese and foreign parties litigation guidance, case inquiry, and other services through Internet, thoroughly removing the geographical restrictions of jurisdictions. Maritime courts across China have continued to carry out patrol hearing, dispute mediation, and promotion of legal awareness in remote areas such as fishing villages and docks, aiming to bridge the last gap in providing access to maritime judicial services. The maritime courts have also established regular exchange mechanisms with shipping and trading enterprises to understand judicial needs, provide judicial services, and help them prevent and mitigate legal risks, which has significantly expanded the influence and scope of maritime justice. The maritime courts of Shanghai, Nanjing, Wuhan, and Ningbo have actively responded to the judicial needs and concerns in the integrated development of the Yangtze River Delta, taken the initiative to provide services integrated into the development of the Yangtze River Delta, strengthened cross-regional judicial cooperation, and jointly created a benchmark for judicial cooperation among maritime courts. In order to further facilitate foreign-related trials, the Shanghai Maritime Court has explored and promoted a mechanism for judicial recognition of the general authorization for a maritime litigation agency and recognized foreign parties’ right to authorize law firms and lawyers in China or their branches in China to represent them in litigation within a certain period and a certain scope, resolving the problem of the overly long period of foreign-related trials due to the procedures of authorization, entrusted notarization and certification, and greatly improving the efficiency of case handling. 10 maritime courts have set up bilingual websites in Chinese and English to display China’s maritime justice to the world. The Higher People’s Court of Liaoning Province is equipped with a simultaneous interpretation room for foreign-related maritime trials, enabling multilingual simultaneous interpretation of trials. The Xiamen Maritime Court provides English translations for references for some civil judgments. The Shanghai Maritime Court has launched a bilingual maritime litigation guideline in Chinese and English. The Guangzhou and Ningbo Maritime Courts provide multilingual litigation services for foreign parties. Pioneering the usage of multiple languages, the maritime courts have facilitated litigation services for the parties, and have told the Chinese story of maritime justice in a way that can be seen and understood both at home and abroad, and have further enhanced the influence of maritime justice across the world.
Improving judicial services. On 30 August 2019, maritime courts took the lead in achieving cross-regional case filings, allowing the parties to go through the filing procedures of all maritime courts at any maritime court across the country. Maritime courts across the country have also successively provided litigation services such as cross-regional material transfers, file retrieval and review, and document collection, and offered Chinese and foreign parties litigation guidance, case inquiry, and other services through Internet, thoroughly removing the geographical restrictions of jurisdictions. Maritime courts across China have continued to carry out patrol hearing, dispute mediation, and promotion of legal awareness in remote areas such as fishing villages and docks, aiming to bridge the last gap in providing access to maritime judicial services. The maritime courts have also established regular exchange mechanisms with shipping and trading enterprises to understand judicial needs, provide judicial services, and help them prevent and mitigate legal risks, which has significantly expanded the influence and scope of maritime justice. The maritime courts of Shanghai, Nanjing, Wuhan, and Ningbo have actively responded to the judicial needs and concerns in the integrated development of the Yangtze River Delta, taken the initiative to provide services integrated into the development of the Yangtze River Delta, strengthened cross-regional judicial cooperation, and jointly created a benchmark for judicial cooperation among maritime courts. In order to further facilitate foreign-related trials, the Shanghai Maritime Court has explored and promoted a mechanism for judicial recognition of the general authorization for a maritime litigation agency and recognized foreign parties’ right to authorize law firms and lawyers in China or their branches in China to represent them in litigation within a certain period and a certain scope, resolving the problem of the overly long period of foreign-related trials due to the procedures of authorization, entrusted notarization and certification, and greatly improving the efficiency of case handling. 10 maritime courts have set up bilingual websites in Chinese and English to display China’s maritime justice to the world. The Higher People’s Court of Liaoning Province is equipped with a simultaneous interpretation room for foreign-related maritime trials, enabling multilingual simultaneous interpretation of trials. The Xiamen Maritime Court provides English translations for references for some civil judgments. The Shanghai Maritime Court has launched a bilingual maritime litigation guideline in Chinese and English. The Guangzhou and Ningbo Maritime Courts provide multilingual litigation services for foreign parties. Pioneering the usage of multiple languages, the maritime courts have facilitated litigation services for the parties, and have told the Chinese story of maritime justice in a way that can be seen and understood both at home and abroad, and have further enhanced the influence of maritime justice across the world.
Promoting the diversified resolution of maritime disputes. Maritime courts across the country insist on resolving disputes at the source, providing services with a forward-thinking mindset, putting the alternative dispute resolution mechanism in the forefront, and pushing forward the development of the two “one-stop” mechanisms so as to provide multiple channels for dispute resolution. The Nanjing Maritime Court has set up one-stop dispute resolution centers for disputes over marine accidents, port disputes, and fishery disputes in places that frequently witnessed such cases and advocated the pre-litigation resolution of cases. The Tianjin Maritime Court has established a Mediation Center for Freight Agency Disputes in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Region to specifically serve maritime freight forwarding agencies. Cooperating with the China Maritime Arbitration Commission, the Shanghai, Guangzhou, Wuhan, Tianjin, and other maritime courts have established the entrusted arbitration and mediation mechanism in maritime cases. The Shanghai Maritime Court and the China Maritime Arbitration Commission have jointly issued the White Paper on Entrusted Mediation in Maritime Cases, giving full play to the advantages of arbitration institutions and resulting in an increasing success rate of dispute resolution. The Dalian Maritime Court has set up a Litigation- Mediation center in its headquarters and dispatched divisions to help build a market-oriented，rule-of-law based and international business environment with high-quality and efficient dispute resolution services. The Qingdao Maritime Court has reached an agreement with the Ocean and Fishery Bureau in Rongcheng, the Fishery Association in Weifang, and other entities on pre-litigation mediation, fuel subsidies for fishing boats, and other matters, providing a smooth channel between litigation and mediation. The Ningbo Maritime Court has issued a white paper on the maritime “Fengqiao Experience”, summarizing and promoting the experience in a timely manner. The establishment of one-stop diversified dispute resolution mechanisms and one-stop litigation service centers of the maritime courts has displayed outstanding features and yielded fruitful results.
Promoting the diversified resolution of maritime disputes. Maritime courts across the country insist on resolving disputes at the source, providing services with a forward-thinking mindset, putting the alternative dispute resolution mechanism in the forefront, and pushing forward the development of the two “one-stop” mechanisms so as to provide multiple channels for dispute resolution. The Nanjing Maritime Court has set up one-stop dispute resolution centers for disputes over marine accidents, port disputes, and fishery disputes in places that frequently witnessed such cases and advocated the pre-litigation resolution of cases. The Tianjin Maritime Court has established a Mediation Center for Freight Agency Disputes in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Region to specifically serve maritime freight forwarding agencies. Cooperating with the China Maritime Arbitration Commission, the Shanghai, Guangzhou, Wuhan, Tianjin, and other maritime courts have established the entrusted arbitration and mediation mechanism in maritime cases. The Shanghai Maritime Court and the China Maritime Arbitration Commission have jointly issued the White Paper on Entrusted Mediation in Maritime Cases, giving full play to the advantages of arbitration institutions and resulting in an increasing success rate of dispute resolution. The Dalian Maritime Court has set up a Litigation- Mediation center in its headquarters and dispatched divisions to help build a market-oriented，rule-of-law based and international business environment with high-quality and efficient dispute resolution services. The Qingdao Maritime Court has reached an agreement with the Ocean and Fishery Bureau in Rongcheng, the Fishery Association in Weifang, and other entities on pre-litigation mediation, fuel subsidies for fishing boats, and other matters, providing a smooth channel between litigation and mediation. The Ningbo Maritime Court has issued a white paper on the maritime “Fengqiao Experience”, summarizing and promoting the experience in a timely manner. The establishment of one-stop diversified dispute resolution mechanisms and one-stop litigation service centers of the maritime courts has displayed outstanding features and yielded fruitful results.
Enhancing the transparency of maritime justice. Maritime courts across the country have actively expanded channels of judicial publicity, enhanced publicity effects, and established an open, dynamic, transparent, and convenient maritime judicial mechanism. From 2018 to 2021, maritime courts across the country successively had published 55 annual white papers which feature trial reports on maritime trials in both Chinese and English, covering the comprehensive work of maritime courts and many specific legal topics such as ocean freight contracts, ship collisions, ship co-ownership, marine fisheries, maritime enforcement, etc., and disclosing trial enforcement data, work highlights, issue suggestions, typical cases, and other aspects in an all-round manner, which is unique in the court system nationwide and presents a real, multi-dimensional, and panoramic view of Chinese maritime justice to continuously improve its transparency and expand domestic and international influence. In 2020, the Dalian Maritime Court ranked first among the Intermediate People’s Courts in Liaoning province in terms of the number of adjudicative documents published online and the effective publicity rate of the judicial process on the website “China Judicial Process Information Online”. The Institute of Law at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences has paid continuous attention to the judicial transparency of maritime courts in China, successively published reports on the transparency index of maritime justice in China, and given positive comments on the judicial transparency measures taken by maritime courts, such as the release of typical cases and the construction of foreign-language websites.
(IV) Attaching Importance to Team Building and Maritime Judicial CapacityBuilding
Strengthening training and research. Firstly, training on practical skills has been strengthened. The SPC and relevant Higher People’s Courts have regularly carried out practical training on maritime trials and given targeted instruction and guidance to enhance the overall capacity of maritime trial teams. Secondly, more research on the rule of law has been carried out. Having successively established the international maritime judicial bases in the Shanghai Maritime Court, the Zhejiang Higher People’s Court, and the Guangzhou Maritime Court, the SPC has given full play to the role of international maritime judicial bases, paid close attention to edge cutting issues and new situations and problems with respect to maritime justice theories and practices, strengthened forward-looking investigation and research, and enhanced the pertinence and timeliness of judicial investigation and research in order to explore theoretical and practical approaches for building the international maritime justice center, and helping to build a maritime community with a shared future. Thirdly, academic exchanges have been deepened. The maritime courts have actively established various academic exchange platforms to encourage judge, assistants and clerks to improve their academic research capabilities. The Ningbo, Guangzhou, and Xiamen Maritime Courts have successively held National Maritime Trial Seminars in line with the national development strategy and maritime trial practice, and have promoted the more profound and practical research of maritime trial theory. The Guangzhou Maritime Law Forum held by the Guangzhou Maritime Court and the academic events and annual meetings of the Wuhan Maritime Court held by the Yangtze River Maritime Law Society have preliminarily become high-level and nationally renowned maritime and commercial law academic platforms. Maritime judges have been active in the China High-end Forum of Maritime Law, the East Asia Forum of Maritime Law, and the annual meetings of local maritime law societies, contributing wisdom to various maritime academic studies and demonstrating their brilliance. The continuous strengthening of training and research has laid a solid foundation for improving the ability of maritime adjudication and building high-quality professional teams for maritime trials.
Strengthening training and research. Firstly, training on practical skills has been strengthened. The SPC and relevant Higher People’s Courts have regularly carried out practical training on maritime trials and given targeted instruction and guidance to enhance the overall capacity of maritime trial teams. Secondly, more research on the rule of law has been carried out. Having successively established the international maritime judicial bases in the Shanghai Maritime Court, the Zhejiang Higher People’s Court, and the Guangzhou Maritime Court, the SPC has given full play to the role of international maritime judicial bases, paid close attention to edge cutting issues and new situations and problems with respect to maritime justice theories and practices, strengthened forward-looking investigation and research, and enhanced the pertinence and timeliness of judicial investigation and research in order to explore theoretical and practical approaches for building the international maritime justice center, and helping to build a maritime community with a shared future. Thirdly, academic exchanges have been deepened. The maritime courts have actively established various academic exchange platforms to encourage judge, assistants and clerks to improve their academic research capabilities. The Ningbo, Guangzhou, and Xiamen Maritime Courts have successively held National Maritime Trial Seminars in line with the national development strategy and maritime trial practice, and have promoted the more profound and practical research of maritime trial theory. The Guangzhou Maritime Law Forum held by the Guangzhou Maritime Court and the academic events and annual meetings of the Wuhan Maritime Court held by the Yangtze River Maritime Law Society have preliminarily become high-level and nationally renowned maritime and commercial law academic platforms. Maritime judges have been active in the China High-end Forum of Maritime Law, the East Asia Forum of Maritime Law, and the annual meetings of local maritime law societies, contributing wisdom to various maritime academic studies and demonstrating their brilliance. The continuous strengthening of training and research has laid a solid foundation for improving the ability of maritime adjudication and building high-quality professional teams for maritime trials.
Expanding international exchanges. The SPC held the Maritime Silk Road (Quanzhou) International Forum on Judicial Cooperation in October 2021, at which in-depth discussions were carried out with representatives from 21 countries including Brazil, Russia, Singapore, and South Africa as well as the International Maritime Organization, the International Seabed Authority, and other international organizations on hot maritime issues such as legal issues concerning the protection of marine natural resources and ecological environment, international recognition of the judicial sale of ships, and the protection of the rights and interests of crew members during the COVID-19 pandemic, gathered the consensus of countries on jointly building the Belt and Road Initiative and building a marine community with a shared future, and boosted mutual learning, exchanges and cooperation in the field of justice among the participants. The SPC continued to appoint representatives to actively participate in the formulation of the Draft Convention on the International Effects of Judicial Sales of Ships (Beijing Draft), playing an important role in finalizing the draft convention, and continuously enhancing the international discourse and influence of China's judicial system. By appointing talents from maritime courts to participate in international forums and seminars on the rule of law, including those between China and the United Kingdom, France, Singapore, and Africa, as well as international conferences on the study of legal issues relating to negotiable multimodal transport documents, more and more Chinese judges have stood out on the international stage to interpret China’s experience in the rule of law and contributed Chinese wisdom to the formulation of international rules. The Guangzhou Maritime Court and the Law School of Dalian Maritime University co-organized the “East Asia Maritime Law Forum”, providing a platform for maritime judges to communicate with maritime law scholars, maritime lawyers, and shipping industry professionals from Hong Kong SAR, Japan, and the Republic of Korea. The increasingly close international exchanges have created a practical platform for the cultivation of specialized interdisciplinary maritime trial teams with international vision, who are proficient in international maritime law, and familiar with international shipping practices.
Expanding international exchanges. The SPC held the Maritime Silk Road (Quanzhou) International Forum on Judicial Cooperation in October 2021, at which in-depth discussions were carried out with representatives from 21 countries including Brazil, Russia, Singapore, and South Africa as well as the International Maritime Organization, the International Seabed Authority, and other international organizations on hot maritime issues such as legal issues concerning the protection of marine natural resources and ecological environment, international recognition of the judicial sale of ships, and the protection of the rights and interests of crew members during the COVID-19 pandemic, gathered the consensus of countries on jointly building the Belt and Road Initiative and building a marine community with a shared future, and boosted mutual learning, exchanges and cooperation in the field of justice among the participants. The SPC continued to appoint representatives to actively participate in the formulation of the Draft Convention on the International Effects of Judicial Sales of Ships (Beijing Draft), playing an important role in finalizing the draft convention, and continuously enhancing the international discourse and influence of China's judicial system. By appointing talents from maritime courts to participate in international forums and seminars on the rule of law, including those between China and the United Kingdom, France, Singapore, and Africa, as well as international conferences on the study of legal issues relating to negotiable multimodal transport documents, more and more Chinese judges have stood out on the international stage to interpret China’s experience in the rule of law and contributed Chinese wisdom to the formulation of international rules. The Guangzhou Maritime Court and the Law School of Dalian Maritime University co-organized the “East Asia Maritime Law Forum”, providing a platform for maritime judges to communicate with maritime law scholars, maritime lawyers, and shipping industry professionals from Hong Kong SAR, Japan, and the Republic of Korea. The increasingly close international exchanges have created a practical platform for the cultivation of specialized interdisciplinary maritime trial teams with international vision, who are proficient in international maritime law, and familiar with international shipping practices.
(Ⅴ) Enhancing the support of modern technology and promoting the application of information technology in maritime trials
Building a new China Maritime Trial website. In 2021, the SPC planned to build the “China Maritime Trial” website, an integrated smart platform, to be implemented by the Guangdong Higher People’s Court and the Guangzhou Maritime Court. With both Chinese and English versions and two platforms for LAN and WAN network connection, the website covers the maritime trials of 11 Chinese maritime courts, and their corresponding Higher People’s Courts and the SPC for appeal trials, and creates a new model of all-round digital maritime litigation services that provides Chinese and foreign parties with online case filing, online trials, cloud enforcement, and other online litigation services. Moreover, the website publishes authoritative maritime judicial information to the public, experts, and scholars to showcase maritime judicial achievements and expands the influence of maritime justice, and equips maritime judges with smart platforms that provide assistance in case handling and management to satisfy the demands of maritime trial work. Connected with and integrated into various information platforms of People’s Courts, the website realizes multiple functions of “smart services, publicity, trial and management” through joint information development and sharing to promote the deeper integration of maritime trials and the building of smart maritime courts, so as to ensure smart maritime trials. The website sets up columns and functions with maritime characteristics, such as “The Voice of the Judge”, “Ship Seizure and Auction”, “Ship Data Analysis System”, “Ship Assessment System” and “Maritime Judicial Cases” which are of great significance in facilitating litigation, improving the quality and efficiency of maritime trials, demonstrating maritime trial achievements, enhancing maritime judicial influence, and promoting the high-quality development of maritime trials.
Promotingthe development of smart maritime courtswith distinct characteristics. Relying on the application of information technology and big data, maritime courts across the country have actively developed tools with distinct characteristics to assist adjudication, thus utilizing more information technology in maritime trials. The “Ship Assessment System” developed by the Guangzhou Maritime Court enables the value assessment of ships free of charge in a fast and accurate manner by building a systematic data model based on ship value assessment methods, which saves time and costs for the parties compared with the traditional method of value assessment, and provides green, environment-friendly and low-carbon professional data references for case mediation and ship auction. The “Ship-Cargo-Port Data Integrated Intelligent Supporting System” developed by the Shanghai Maritime Court has four major functions: real-time ship inquiry, trajectory tracking, collision simulation, and early warning and tracking. Based on big data, the system provides intelligent analysis of collision facts and the causes of collision in maritime tort disputes, thus providing digitalized assistance to judges to hear cases. The maritime judicial case database established by the Ningbo Maritime Court, based on the International Maritime Justice Base of the Supreme People’s Court in Zhejiang, is the first Internet maritime legal service platform in China that deeply integrates professional services for the knowledge of maritime law and intelligent analysis of case-based big data. By the end of 2021, the column of maritime trialsin the case database had included 122,115 adjudicative documents, covering all kinds of maritime professional data resources needed by maritime judges to handle cases, and providing reliable guarantees for the effective operation of the compulsory retrieval mechanism for similar and related cases, which is beneficialto regulate judges’ discretion and unify adjudication standards. The data-based, digital, and intelligent development of maritime trials have integrated judicial and digital technologies and combines offline and online litigation, resulting in the reform of litigation modes. During COVID-19 pandemic, maritime courts, on top of the achievements of developing smart courts, have effectively mitigated the impact of the pandemic on litigation activities. They effectively provided all-round and full-process “contactless” online litigation services for Chinese and foreign parties, so as to achieve “no suspension of trial and enforcement, with non-stop fairness and justice”. It is fair to say technology-enabled maritime justice shows bright prospects.
Promotingthe development of smart maritime courtswith distinct characteristics. Relying on the application of information technology and big data, maritime courts across the country have actively developed tools with distinct characteristics to assist adjudication, thus utilizing more information technology in maritime trials. The “Ship Assessment System” developed by the Guangzhou Maritime Court enables the value assessment of ships free of charge in a fast and accurate manner by building a systematic data model based on ship value assessment methods, which saves time and costs for the parties compared with the traditional method of value assessment, and provides green, environment-friendly and low-carbon professional data references for case mediation and ship auction. The “Ship-Cargo-Port Data Integrated Intelligent Supporting System” developed by the Shanghai Maritime Court has four major functions: real-time ship inquiry, trajectory tracking, collision simulation, and early warning and tracking. Based on big data, the system provides intelligent analysis of collision facts and the causes of collision in maritime tort disputes, thus providing digitalized assistance to judges to hear cases. The maritime judicial case database established by the Ningbo Maritime Court, based on the International Maritime Justice Base of the Supreme People’s Court in Zhejiang, is the first Internet maritime legal service platform in China that deeply integrates professional services for the knowledge of maritime law and intelligent analysis of case-based big data. By the end of 2021, the column of maritime trialsin the case database had included 122,115 adjudicative documents, covering all kinds of maritime professional data resources needed by maritime judges to handle cases, and providing reliable guarantees for the effective operation of the compulsory retrieval mechanism for similar and related cases, which is beneficialto regulate judges’ discretion and unify adjudication standards. The data-based, digital, and intelligent development of maritime trials have integrated judicial and digital technologies and combines offline and online litigation, resulting in the reform of litigation modes. During COVID-19 pandemic, maritime courts, on top of the achievements of developing smart courts, have effectively mitigated the impact of the pandemic on litigation activities. They effectively provided all-round and full-process “contactless” online litigation services for Chinese and foreign parties, so as to achieve “no suspension of trial and enforcement, with non-stop fairness and justice”. It is fair to say technology-enabled maritime justice shows bright prospects.
Afterword
The report of the 20th CPC National Congress pointed out, “promote high-level opening-up”, “develop marine economy, protect the marine ecological environment, and accelerate to build China into a marine power.”The Outline of the 14th Five-year Plan for Economic and Social Development and Long-range objectives through the Year 2035 of the People’s Republic of China put forward: “Adhere to the coordinated development between land and sea, maintain harmony between people and ocean, achieve win-win cooperation, and coordinate the promotion of marine ecological protection, economic development and protection of rights and interests, in order to speed up the construction of China into a strong maritime country”, and “strengthen maritime justice, and resolutely safeguard the country’s maritime rights and interests”. Facing new situation and new tasks, under the guidance of the Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era, the courts participating in maritime adjudication nationwide will continue to thoroughly implement the Xi Jinping Thought on the Rule of Law, seriously study and implement the spirit of the 20th CPC National Congress, give full play to the functions of the maritime trial, and promote maritime work with stamina and diligence to increase achievements. The courts will continue to contribute judicial wisdom and strength to building a modern marine industry, a sustainable marine ecological environment and deeper participation in global ocean governance with best judicial practice. As the Chinese saying goes, constant dropping wears the stone. In this spirit, China’s maritime trial is accelerating along the road of building an international maritime judicial center and participating in the construction of a community with a shared future for the oceans.
Appendix：
I. Maritime Judicial Interpretations Issued and Revised during 2018-2021
II. Maritime Guiding Cases and Typical Cases Released during 2018-2021
