本文將以英國海上保險法(Marine Insurance Act 1906，簡稱MIA 1906)中第78條損害防阻條款(s78 Suing and Labouring)為研究軸心，探討此條款所涵蓋之法令規範及相關利益當事人所需個別承擔之損害防阻義務及應可享有之權利。於此，除了探討第78條相關損害防阻義務法條及補償法條性質外，並藉由法院之相關判決判例來了解此條款所產生之爭議，其主要爭議仍是關於損害防阻費用之各項成立要件和義務履行及賠償適用原則不明所致。
另本文將同時併用文獻探討方式與比較歸納法來闡述損害防阻條款於英國普通法系(Common Law)下從過去到現今所產生相關損害防阻條款之實務應用與法院之判決判例。此外同時也藉由各個不同之判決判例及學者之論點，來歸納不同法官在不同的時空背景下所採用判定之標準。因而本文所歸納分析損害防阻費用條款之所適用通則及爭議評論，主要是試著找出其中的衡平點來解決歸因於損害防阻費用條款之衝突矛盾及釋義不清的模糊灰色地帶，並建議實務面該如何改善。然而最重要就是要深入了解損害防阻費用條款真正之存在意義(鼓勵被保險人及其代理人採取和理措施以避免損失擴大，以達避免社會資源的浪費)。 The section 78 of Suing and Labouring stipulated in Marine Insurance Act 1906 (“MIA 1906”) is of huge importance to each stakeholders (specifically as ship、cargo owners or other interested parties) under various marine insurance policy which would directly generate assured’s duty to avert the loss as well as the deserved reimbursement to alleviate assured’s loss to a certain extent. However, heavy arguments arise from its nature of Sue and Labour clause、duty of the assureds and their servants and agents、the definition of each conditions (ie. “reasonableness” or ”cut-off time”) and then the prerequisite(s) of the reimbursement that can apply the clause to have a supplementary sum-insured cover to the assured.
The study firstly aims at the origin of the Sue and Labour clause to compare and explore the reason why the clause exists in most marine insurance policy although a bundle of conflicts and arguments still confuse most interested parties, resulting in more gray area to be clarified. With a view to decoding the function and the application of the clause, the study accordingly refers to relevant law cases occurring mostly in England to try the best to further find out the formula with respect to the real effect of Sue and Labour clause.
