作者：郭红岩
作者介绍：中国政法大学国际法学院副教授，法学博士
出版日期：2014年12月9日
内容提要 船王求偿案虽被一些媒体误读为民间对日求偿案，但实际是缘起于 1936 年上海中威轮船公司和日本大同海运株式会社的定期租船合同纠纷。由于日本公司只支 付了部分租金，未依约还船，导致两轮沉没。尽管在此过程中日本海军曾对两轮“拿捕”， 但因未经捕获法院合法裁判，捕获不成立，该案作为普通商事纠纷的性质并未改变。上海 海事法院 1988 年 12 月 31 日受理该案后，于 2007 年 12 月 7 日判决原告胜诉，并在 2014 年 4 月进行了强制执行。该案从原告开始求偿到判决的强制执行，长达 77 年，并涉及船舶捕 获、定期租船合同当事人的违约和侵权责任、原被告的诉讼主体资格以及案件的管辖和法 律适用等诸多法律问题。
关键词 船王求偿案 定期租船合同 船舶捕获
Abstract: Having misreading as a claim for War Ｒeparations against Japanese，Shipping Tycoon’s case originated from a time charter between Shanghai Chung Wei Steamship Co． and Japanese Daido Kaiun Corporation in 1936． When the contract expired，the latter company had neither paid out all the rents nor returned any ship． After that all the two ships sank while the latter company continuously used them． The nature of the case had not changed because the prize of the two ships was unlawful，so the Shanghai Maritime Court registered the case on December 31，1988，judged for the plaintiff on December 7，2007，and enforced the judgment in April 2014． Having passed through 77 years，it involves many legal issues: liability for breach of contract caused by the defendant’s failure to pay all the rent or return the ships; the defendant’s tort liability for unauthorized use of the ships; Japanese War Ｒeparations for its illegal “capture”of the ships and take away the ships’insurance; Japanese courts’unjust denial the case on the excuse of “politics”and “extinction of act limitation”; jurisdiction and applicable law for Shanghai Maritime Court to the claims; litigation qualification of the plaintiff’s heir; inheritance rights and obligations and legal status of the defendants caused from mergers; and the enforcement of judgments; and so on． However，the author only want to focus on prize of ships in international law，the parties of a time charter contract and their breach of contract and tort liability，and jurisdiction over civil and commercial cases．