貨物錯誤申報與船舶安全：船上爆炸事故下的法律責任探討

在海上運輸實務中，船舶的安全仰賴各方履行其應盡的義務，其中尤以託運人如實申報貨物性質為關鍵。特別是在涉及危險品運送時，貨物的正確申報不僅攸關船舶本身的安全，更直接影響船員生命、其他貨物、港口設施的安全。

實務上曾發生多起因託運人錯誤申報或隱匿危險品性質，導致船舶於航行或裝卸作業期間發生爆炸或火災的事故，造成嚴重財產損失與人身傷亡。面對此類事件，運送人／船東該如何主張損害賠償？貨主將可能面臨哪些法律責任？

本文就託運人錯誤申報貨物時，可能涉及的契約責任與侵權行為責任，提供釐清責任歸屬的參考。

一、依據運送契約所生的契約責任

多數運送條款明確要求託運人申報危險物品，並提供正確且完整的貨物資訊。託運人若違反此等義務，即構成違約責任。此外，海上運送，依台灣法律體系，應優先適用《海商法》之規定。

依《海商法》第55條第1項，託運人有義務向運送人保證其就貨物名稱、數量、包裝種類、件數及標誌等所為之通知內容正確。若貨主錯誤申報貨物（如實際為危險品卻未揭露）而致貨物引發爆炸，運送人證明託運人通知的貨物內容與實際貨物狀況不符（不正確性），且該錯誤申報與爆炸損害間具因果關係，即得依《海商法》第55條主張損害賠償。

除《海商法》外，運送人亦可依《民法》第631條規定主張契約責任。該條明定，若運送物依其性質可能對人或財產造成損害，託運人應於締約前將其性質告知運送人，否則應負損害賠償責任。而實務判決（例如臺灣高等法院92年度上易字第1260號判決）曾指出，該條文適用須以「貨物之性質」確實具備致損害之虞為前提，若貨物本質非危險物，或損害非由貨物性質直接引起，則無法據以請求賠償。

二、侵權行為責任

運送人亦可依《民法》第184條主張侵權行為責任。該條規定，凡因故意或過失、不法侵害他人權利，應負損害賠償責任。倘若託運人違反《海商法》第55條第1項所課予之告知義務，即可作為其主觀上具有一定過失之佐證。

進一步而言，運送貨物若屬《船舶危險品裝載規則》所定義之危險品，託運人須依該規則第37條向船東或船長提交「危險品託運書」並且揭露必要資訊。若託運人錯誤將危險品申報為一般貨物，未履行法定告知義務，亦可認其具有過失（參照臺灣高等法院82年度海商上字第13號判決）。

三、舉證責任

運送人主張前述契約責任或侵權行為責任時，應證明託運人具有過失。法院實務上曾認定，將危險物品誤報為一般貨物，已構成託運人未履行申報義務，足以推定其有過失。故當運送人能證明託運人未正確申報貨物，即完成初步舉證責任，舉證責任即轉由託運人負擔，證明其並無過失或已善盡告知義務。

小結

在海上運輸中，正確申報貨物是託運人不可推卸的基本義務。若因錯誤申報導致船上發生爆炸或其他災損事件，不僅將面臨契約責任與侵權責任的追究，甚且可能因此衍生行政或刑事責任。運送人／船東在發生事故後，宜儘早蒐集相關證據，包括提單、裝箱單、貨物申報文件與貨物實際狀況等，釐清事實並評估主張權利之法律依據。

反之，託運人若遭受求償，亦應審慎檢視自身申報流程及內部控管機制，並視需要提出反證或主張責任減輕。

Misdeclaration of Cargo and Ship Safety: Legal Liabilities Arising from Onboard Explosions

In maritime transport practice, the safety of a vessel relies heavily on the proper fulfillment of obligations by all parties involved. Among these, the shipper's duty to accurately declare the nature of the cargo is of particular importance. This is especially critical when dangerous goods are involved, as proper declaration not only affects the safety of the vessel itself but also has a direct impact on the lives of crew members, the safety of other cargo, and the integrity of port facilities.

There have been multiple incidents where a shipper’s misdeclaration or concealment of dangerous goods has led to explosions or fires during the voyage or loading/unloading operations, resulting in significant property loss and personal injuries. When such accidents occur, what claims for compensation can the carrier or shipowner pursue? What legal liabilities might the shipper face?

This article provides an overview of the contractual and tortious liabilities that may arise under Taiwanese law when a shipper misdeclares cargo, and offers guidance on how responsibility may be assessed.

1. Contractual Liability Under the Carriage Contract

Most carriage terms expressly require shippers to declare dangerous goods and provide accurate and complete cargo information. A shipper’s failure to fulfill such obligations constitutes a contractual breach. Additionally, under Taiwan’s legal framework, maritime matters are governed primarily by the Maritime Act.

According to Article 55, Paragraph 1 of the Taiwanese Maritime Act, the shipper is obligated to guarantee the accuracy of the cargo’s name, quantity, packaging type, number of packages, and markings provided to the carrier. If a shipper misdeclares cargo (e.g., conceals that it is dangerous goods) and an explosion subsequently occurs, the carrier may claim compensation under this provision, provided that the carrier can prove:
(1) the shipper’s declaration was inaccurate (i.e., the declared cargo did not match the actual cargo); and
(2) a causal link exists between the misdeclaration and the resulting explosion or damage.

Apart from the Maritime Act, carriers may also invoke Article 631 of the Civil Code to claim contractual liability. This provision states that if the nature of the goods may pose a risk of harm to persons or property, the shipper must disclose such nature before concluding the contract. Failure to do so results in liability for any resulting damage. However, court practice (e.g., Taiwan High Court Civil Judgment, Shang-Yi-Zi No. 1260 of 2003) has clarified that the application of this article is limited to goods whose inherent nature poses a risk of harm. If the cargo is not dangerous by nature, or if the damage was not directly caused by such nature, this article may not be applicable.

2. Tortious Liability

The carrier may also bring a claim under Article 184 of the Civil Code, which provides for liability arising from intentional or negligent acts that unlawfully infringe on the rights of others. If a shipper violates the declaration obligation under Article 55, Paragraph 1 of the Maritime Act, such violation may support a finding of negligence.

Furthermore, if the cargo in question qualifies as "dangerous goods" under the Regulations for the Carriage and Stowage of Dangerous Goods by Ships, the shipper is required under Article 37 of the Regulations to submit a Dangerous Goods Shipping Declaration to the shipowner or master, disclosing required information in the prescribed format. If the shipper misdeclares dangerous goods as general cargo and fails to fulfill this statutory duty of disclosure, such conduct may be deemed negligent (see Taiwan High Court judgment, Maritime-Shang-Zi No. 13 of 1993).

3. Burden of Proof

When asserting claims based on contractual or tortious liability, the carrier bears the burden of proving the shipper’s negligence. In practice, Taiwanese courts have found that misdeclaring dangerous goods as general cargo constitutes a failure to fulfill the shipper’s duty of disclosure and gives rise to a presumption of negligence. Therefore, once the carrier proves that the shipper failed to accurately declare the cargo, the initial burden of proof is met, and the burden shifts to the shipper to prove that they were not negligent or had otherwise fulfilled their duty of disclosure.

Conclusion

In maritime transport, accurate cargo declaration is a fundamental and non-delegable duty of the shipper. When explosions or other damages occur onboard as a result of misdeclaration, the shipper may face both contractual and tortious liability, and in some cases, administrative or even criminal consequences.

Following such incidents, the carrier or shipowner should promptly collect relevant evidence - including bills of lading, packing lists, cargo declarations, and inspection records - to ascertain the facts and evaluate possible legal claims. Conversely, shippers facing claims should carefully review their internal declaration procedures and control mechanisms and, if necessary, present rebuttal evidence or argue for a reduction of liability.

Through mutual adherence to legal obligations and responsible risk management, both parties can contribute to safer and more reliable maritime operations.