郵輪契約之法律性質

郵輪契約在規範郵輪旅客與郵輪業者間關於旅客在郵輪上之各項權利義務關係，及在人身傷亡或財物損失之賠償責任。惟因郵輪契約常經由旅行社洽定，則旅行社、旅客及郵輪業者間之權利義務關係為何？而其契約約定內容之效力又為何？若契約內容違反法律強制規定則無效，則我國現行法律對郵輪契約之規範又如何？在適用法律中，海商法應為海上旅客運送之特別法，但現行海商法之規定卻甚為簡單且未必合理，而須引用其他法律補充規範。依目前法律體制內容，與國際間生效之雅典公約差異甚大，未來如何修正海商法與國際立法趨勢接軌，亦為主要課題之一。此外，郵輪契約實為包含運送、租賃、買賣、旅遊等契約的混合契約。其法律性質為何，涉及契約當事人權利義務關係，以及相關法律之適用問題。本文乃探討上述議題，並分析相關法律之規範內容，以及其與現行國際公約有何差異，期能提供實務及未來修正海商法之參考。 Cruise passage contracts are fixed for providing those responsibility and liability issues between passengers and cruise operators while performing the contracts, including loss of life or personal injury and damage to luggage. Such contracts are often concluded through travelling agent, there arise issues concerning who acts as the carrier of the contracts, and the legal relationship between passengers, travelling agents and cruise operators. It also needs to consider the validity of the contractual terms under prevailing laws, which are applicable with mandatory effects. Maritime Law has priority in regulating those contractual issues under cruise passage contracts. However, current rules provided by Taiwan , s Maritime Law appears insufficient and improper in the application, so that other relevant laws and rules are often applied for determining contractual liabilities arising from cruise passage contracts. It is often recommended to modify passenger transportation rules of current Maritime Law by reference to Athens Convention. Furthermore, cruise passage contracts not only include the carriage of passengers by cruise ship, but also include those activities concerning cabin and food provisions, recreation events on board the ship. Therefore, it also needs to consider relevant regulations as provided by Civil Code and Consumer Protection Law, etc. This article analyzes the above issues, and explores the application of relevant laws and regulations in order to provide suggestion and reference for shipping practice and future revision of Maritime Law.