大家
[发表评论] [查看此文评论]    郭国汀律师专栏
[主页]->[大家]->[郭国汀律师专栏]->[加拿大著名人权律师安世立支持声援全球绝食抗暴的声明]
郭国汀律师专栏
·《CIF和 FOB合同》第四版 郭国汀主译校
·《CIF 和 FOB合同》郭国汀主译校 第二章 装运
·〈CIF 和 FOB 合同〉郭国汀主译校 第四章 保险(王崇能译)
·〈CIF 和 FOB 合同〉郭国汀主译校 第五章 交单和付款(高建平译)
·〈CIF 和 FOB 合同〉郭国汀主译校 第六章 法律救济(梅欢雪译)
·〈CIF 和 FOB 合同〉郭国汀主译校 第七章 冲突法(黄辉译)
·〈CIF 和 FOB 合同〉郭国汀主译校 第八章 各种类型的FOB合同(陈真,王崇能,黄辉,郭国汀译)
·〈CIF 和 FOB 合同〉郭国汀主译校 第九章 FOB交付(蔡仲翰译)
·〈CIF 和 FOB 合同〉郭国汀主译校 第十章 FOB价格条款
·〈CIF 和 FOB 合同〉郭国汀主译校 第十一章 付款与接受(王力耘译)
·〈CIF 和 FOB 合同〉郭国汀主译校 第十二章保险 (李小玲译)
·〈CIF 和 FOB 合同〉郭国汀主译校 第十三章 法律救济(李小玲译)
·〈CIF 和 FOB 合同〉郭国汀主译校 第十四章 法律冲突(王力耘译)
***(6)《Scrutton 租船合同与提单》郭国汀译
·《Scrutton on 租船合同与提单》序
·我为法学翻译辩护- 《SCRUTTON租船合同与提单》译后记 
·《SCRUTTON租船合同与提单》郭国汀译朱曾杰校 第一章:合同的性质、效力与解释
·《Scrutton on 租船合同与提单》郭国汀译朱曾杰校 第二章:合同当事人
·《SCRUTTON租船合同与提单》郭国汀译、朱曾杰校 第三章:代理
·《Scrutton on 租船合同与提单》郭国汀译朱曾杰校 第四章:租船合同
·《SCRUTTON租船合同与提单》郭国汀译、朱曾杰校 第五章:作为合同的提单
·《Scrutton on 租船合同与提单》郭国汀译朱曾杰校 第六章:租船合同项下货物的提单
·〈SCRUTTON 租船合同与提单〉郭国汀译 朱曾杰校 第七章:合同条款
·〈SCRUTTON 租船合同与提单〉郭国汀译 朱曾杰校 第八章:陈述
·〈SCRUTTON 租船合同与提单〉郭国汀译 朱曾杰校 第九章:合同的履行:装船
·〈SCRUTTON 租船合同与提单〉郭国汀译 朱曾杰校 第十章:提单作为物权凭证
·〈SCRUTTON 租船合同与提单〉郭国汀译 朱曾杰校 第十一章:船东对承运贷物的灭失或损坏之责任
·〈SCRUTTON 租船合同与提单〉郭国汀译 朱曾杰校 第十二章:合同的履行:航次租船
·〈SCRUTTON 租船合同与提单〉郭国汀译 朱曾杰校 第十三章:合同的履行:卸货
·〈SCRUTTON 租船合同与提单〉郭国汀译 朱曾杰校 第十四章:滞期费
·〈SCRUTTON 租船合同与提单〉郭国汀译 朱曾杰校 第十五章:运费
·《SCRUTTON租船合同与提单》郭国汀译、朱曾杰校 第十六章:定期租船
·《Scrutton on 租船合同与提单》郭国汀译朱曾杰校 第十七章:联运提单,联合运输,集装箱
·〈SCRUTTON 租船合同与提单〉郭国汀译 朱曾杰校 第十八章:留置权
·〈SCRUTTON 租船合同与提单〉郭国汀译 朱曾杰校 第十九章:损害赔偿
·〈SCRUTTON 租船合同与提单〉郭国汀译 朱曾杰校 第二十章:1971年〈海上货物运输法〉
·〈SCRUTTON 租船合同与提单〉郭国汀译 朱曾杰校 第二十一章:管辖权与诉讼时效
***(7)《Omay 海上保险:法律与保险单》郭国汀主译校
·王海明序《Omay 海上保险的法律与保险单》
·《OMAY海上保险的法律与保险单》序
·《Omay 海上保险:法律与保险单》译后记
·朱曾杰序《OMAY海上保险的法律与保险单》
·《OMAY 海上保险:法律与保险单》郭国汀主译 冯立奇校 第一章:导论
·《OMAY 海上保险:法律与保险单》郭国汀主译 冯立奇校 第二章:海上保险
·《OMAY 海上保险:法律与保险单》郭国汀主译 冯立奇校 第三章:船舶险I
·《OMAY 海上保险:法律与保险单》郭国汀主译 冯立奇校 第四章:船舶险II
·《OMAY 海上保险:法律与保险单》郭国汀主译 冯立奇校 第五章:货物风险
·《OMAY 海上保险:法律与保险单》郭国汀主译 冯立奇校 第六章:货物除外责任
·《OMAY 海上保险:法律与保险单》郭国汀主译 冯立奇校 第七章:碰撞责任
·《OMAY 海上保险:法律与保险单》郭国汀主译 冯立奇校 第八章:战争险
·《OMAY 海上保险:法律与保险单》郭国汀主译 冯立奇校 第九章:罢工、暴乱和民事骚乱
·《OMAY 海上保险:法律与保险单》郭国汀主译 冯立奇校 第十章:近因
·《OMAY 海上保险:法律与保险单》郭国汀主译 冯立奇校 第十一章:施救费用
·《OMAY 海上保险:法律与保险单》郭国汀主译 冯立奇校 第十二章:共同海损
·《OMAY 海上保险:法律与保险单》郭国汀主译 冯立奇校 第十三章:救助
·《OMAY 海上保险:法律与保险单》郭国汀主译 冯立奇校 第十四章:全损\实际全损
·《OMAY 海上保险:法律与保险单》郭国汀主译 冯立奇校 第十五章:单独海损
·《OMAY 海上保险:法律与保险单》郭国汀主译 冯立奇校 第十六章:代位追偿权
·《OMAY 海上保险:法律与保险单》郭国汀主译 冯立奇校 第十七章:重复保险与分摊
***(8)《郭国汀辩护词代理词自选集》郭国汀著
·《郭国汀辩护词、代理词自选》
·“五懂”律师多多益善--《郭国汀律师辩护词、代理词精选》序
·张思之 他扬起了风帆——序《郭国汀辩护词代理词自选集》
·张凌序《郭国汀辩护词、代理词自选》
***(9)《郭国汀海事海商论文自选》郭国汀著
·《郭国汀海商法论文自选》
***(10)《项目融资》郭国汀 许兆宁 高建平 王崇能译郭国汀审校
·《项目融资》郭国汀 许兆宁 高建平 王崇能 译郭国汀审校 第一章:当事人的目标
·《项目融资》郭国汀 许兆宁 高建平 王崇能 译 第六章:保险问题
·《项目融资》郭国汀 许兆宁 高建平 王崇能 译 第四章:信用(融资)协议
·《项目融资》郭国汀 许兆宁 高建平 王崇能 译 第十章:未来
·《项目融资》郭国汀 许兆宁 高建平 王崇能 译 第八章:其他法律问题
***(11)《油污和碰撞责任》郭国汀译
·《油污和碰撞责任》郭国汀译 第三编:油污 第十一章:导论
·《油污和碰撞责任》郭国汀译 第三编:油污 第十二章:船舶油污及国际公共卫生法的调整
***(12)《国际贸易法》郭国汀、陆怡、李涛译
·《国际贸易法》郭国汀、陆怡、李涛译 第六章:国际技术转让
·《国际贸易法》郭国汀、陆怡、李涛译 第七章:外国投资
***(13)《国际海事海商法》郭国汀、沈军、王崇能、冯敏译
·《国际海事海商法》郭国汀、沈军、王崇能、冯敏译 第一章:海事海商法的简明历史
·《国际海事海商法》郭国汀、沈军、王崇能、冯敏译 第五章:拖航
·《国际海事海商法》郭国汀、沈军、王崇能、冯敏译 第十章:管辖及程序
·《国际海事海商法》郭国汀、沈军、王崇能、冯敏译 第十一章:海洋污染
·《国际海事海商法》郭国汀、沈军、王崇能、冯敏译 第十二章:特别法定权利、海上留置权、抵押权及其他请求权
·《国际海事海商法》郭国汀、沈军、王崇能、冯敏译 第十三章:旅客运输
***(14)《现代提单的法律与实务》郭国汀/赖民译
·《现代提单的法律与实务》译者的话/郭国汀译
[列出本栏目所有内容]
欢迎在此做广告
加拿大著名人权律师安世立支持声援全球绝食抗暴的声明

   加拿大著名人权律师安世立支持声援全球绝食抗暴的声明
   Statement in Support of Gao Zhisheng and World Wide Hunger Strike by Lawyers
   I wish to add my voice to those of lawyers and human rights organizations throughout the world in condemning the shocking and unceasing affronts to human rights and the rule of law perpetrated by the Government of China against lawyers of conscience.
   
   

   China is obligated both by its own laws, which the Government of China routinely ignores, and by international treaties and conventions binding China both as a signatory and also as a member state of the United Nations, to protect lawyers and ensure they are free to carry out their professional duties as advocates for their clients. The Chinese government has made a cynical mockery of all its obligations to lawyers and human rights advocates, in total violation of its obligations under both Chinese and International Law.
   
   
   The Chinese government today is arguably the worst violator of human rights on this planet, in partnership with western corporations such as Microsoft, Nortel, Yahoo, Cisco and Google. Many western governments, with an eye on their “market share” in China, have obsequiously fawned at the feet of the Chinese dictators and willingly assisted those dictators in promoting their claims that the human rights situation in China has never been better.
   
   
   
   The last Prime Minister of Canada, Paul Martin, shamelessly congratulated the Beijing regime on its alleged progress in promoting human rights and implementing the “rule of law”, in the face of overwhelming and irrefutable evidence that the Beijing dictators are crushing human rights as never before and that they are ruthlessly determined to prevent the rule of law at any cost. Indeed, both Paul Martin and Jean Chretien before him prattled on incessantly about the “great progress” in Chinese human rights under the Beijing dictatorship even as Beijing was implementing a policy of full scale genocide against practitioners of Falun Gong.
   
   
   The first prominent human rights lawyer in China was Guo Guoting. His unbelievable courage in risking his own life and standing up to the brutal government of China has inspired a number of other honest lawyers throughout China to stand up for the rule of law, for human rights, for freedom of religion and political belief, against the Beijing regime. Today, Gao Zhisheng leads the fight inside China, while Guo Guoting, now resident in Canada, coordinates the international effort of lawyers everywhere to support their beleaguered and persecuted colleagues in China.
   
   
   Gao Zhisheng, like Guo Guoting, is a man with a level of courage probably beyond the comprehension of anyone not intimately familiar with the brutality and mendacity of the Beijing regime and the Chinese Communist Party. The Beijing regime has prevented him from practising his profession and has recently attempted to kill him. Indeed, were it not for the international attention and support he has received, the Chinese government would have succeeded in murdering him already.
   
   
   Gao Zhisheng spoke out on behalf of Falun Gong practitioners who are denied by the Chinese government their constitutional right to legal defence. He wrote an open letter to President Hu Jintao, specifically addressing the fact that these practitioners are citizens of China and must therefore have the same right to legal defence as all other Chinese citizens (which in practice is of little assistance to any citizen in any case). Mr. Gao also met in December with the United Nations emissary to China who had been sent to investigate reports of torture and other human rights abuses.
   
   
   Shortly thereafter, the Chinese authorities confiscated Mr. Gao’s licence to practise law, and closed down his law office, preventing the other ten lawyers in Mr. Gao’s office from practising their profession. The transparently false justification for these actions was that Mr. Gao had failed to report a change of address when renewing the registration of his law office!
   
   
   Since that time, several other courageous human rights lawyers from all over China have been arrested, incarcerated, harassed, threatened, and in some cases beaten, simply for discharging their professional duties as lawyers. Moreover, a recent attempt was made on Gao Zhisheng’s life, an attempt almost certainly the work of the Chinese police and military.
   
   
   Mr. Gao has now initiated a protest campaign of rotating hunger strikes by lawyers in several cities of China and Ms Sheng Xue has called on lawyers throughout the world to join this movement.
   
   
   We support Mr. Gao. We support the world wide hunger strike by lawyers of conscience. We support the demand that the Chinese government be held to at least minimum international standards of decency and civilization. And we call upon the new Government of Canada to reverse the last government’s shameful complicity in the crimes of the Beijing regime. We hope that the new Canadian government will express its support for Gao Zhisheng, for the world wide hunger strike by lawyers of conscience, and for the demand that Beijing recognize the rule of law and respect at least the minimal international norms of human rights and basic decency.
   
   Clive Ansley
   

©Boxun News Network All Rights Reserved.
所有栏目和文章由作者或专栏管理员整理制作,均不代表博讯立场

;   “保险财产的所有人或其他对其有利益或有责任的当事人由于海上风险的原因对第三方产生的任何责任。”
   在《海上保险法》第74条“对第三方责任”的标题下规定:
   “Where the assured has effected an insurance in express terms against any liability to a third party, the measure of indemnify, subject to any express provision in the policy, is the amount paid or payable by him to such third party in respect of such liability”.
    “被保险人已通过明示条款对第三方的任何责任进行投保,根据保险单上明示条款的规定,获得补偿的数额是其就这一责任向第三方支付或应支付的数额。”
    如果需要权威论点的话,这些法定条款对今天的包括碰撞责任在内的第三方责任保险便是权威。
   协会碰撞责任条款(Institute Collision Liability Clause)
   若未考查其历史,碰撞责任条款似乎是一个相当混杂的条款,让我们回到条款本身,即1983年10月1日协会船舶定期保险条款第8条。虽然其基本特点保持未变,该条款的格式要比船舶碰撞条款清晰和简单的多,保险人不想修改或改变原先船舶碰撞条款的适用范围和含义。四分之三(赔偿责任)的碰撞责任条款全文如下:
   8.1 The underwriters agree to indemnify the Assured for three-fourths of any sum or sums paid by the Assured to any other person or persons by reason of the Assured becoming legally liable by way of damages for
   8.1.1 loss of or damage to any other vessel or property on any other vessel
   8.1.2 delay to or loss of use of any such other vessel or property thereon
   8.1.3 general average of, salvage of , or salvage under contract of, any such other vessel or property thereon,
    where such payment by the Assured is in consequence of the Vessel hereby insured coming into collision with any other vessel.
   8.2 The indemnity provided by this Clause 8 shall be in addition to the indemnity provided by the other terms and conditions of this insurance and shall be subject to the following provisions:
   8.2.1 Where the insured Vessel is in collision with another vessel and both vessels are to blame, then, unless the liability of one or both vessels becomes limited by law, the indemnity under this Clause 8 shall be calculated on the principle of cross-liabilities as if the respective Owners had been compelled to pay to each other such proportion of each other’s damages as may have been properly allowed in ascertaining the balance or sum payable by or to the Assured in consequence of the collision.

[上一页][目前是第2页][下一页]

©Boxun News Network All Rights Reserved.
所有栏目和文章由作者或专栏管理员整理制作,均不代表博讯立场