علی زارع

Minerals in nature are one of the most valuable treasures on the earth, which due to the limitation of these resources on land and its heterogeneous distribution in different countries, has made human beings think about extracting the new resources. The limited mineral resources on land and the heterogeneous distribution of these substances in different countries have made human beings think about extracting and using the resources of other parts of the earth and even other planets. Deep-sea mineral resources can be considered as a reliable alternative to compensate for the limitations of land resources. The developed countries were more concerned with the use of these resources than others because, given the dependence of their economies on third-world mineral resources, the development of offshore resources could mean the liberation of their economies from this dependence. In political and scientific circles, the concept of the common heritage of humanity was gradually introduced, based on which activities related to mining in the deep sea. The method of this research is a descriptive-analytical study using library resources, the study of articles, and a review of environmental treaties and related internet resources. The result of this research shows, that none of these legal systems in the field of responsibility can respond to the challenges independently. This research tries to provide a legal solution by considering the opinions of environmental experts, an executive solution about achieving new financial resources based on combined systems of environmental responsibility.

Purpose: The present paper aims to find the exact responsibility of maritime carriers under the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act. In this regard, the delicacy of the US legislature has always been considered by other legal systems. Also, the attitude of the Rotterdam Rules towards new issues, such as the entry of electronic shipping documents and the hybrid carriage into the industry, has created new dimensions in relation to the responsibility of carriers, which justifies such study. Methodology: The research methodology will be analytical-descriptive. In this method, the existing references on the subject are investigated to comparatively identify and describe the rights and duties of the maritime carrier. Then, based on rational-legal rules, the subject is analyzed to show the ambiguities and the real status of the subject. Findings: in considerations done, there are many important conventions like HARTER act, Hague on 1924, Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1936, the HAMBURG regulations on 1978 and ROTTERDAM on 2009, that have mentioned the marine transportation responsibility and these laws and regulations, behave with the factor of damages, based on the case and based on the responsibility and fault assumption related to the transportation responsible. Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, has been trying to compensate The Hague convention deficiencies meanwhile referring some cases to the sub-regulations and using some ways and approaches and the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, has set some limitations for the responsibilities that sometimes the carriers put them for themselves and for example, each carrier, cannot decrease its responsibility to less than 50 American dollars, that is confirmed for each parcel in the law. Conclusion: the ROTTERDAM regulations, has started considering the dispensation of marine transportation responsible and meantime, has canceled the duty and fault dispensation in navigation and ship handling. And the ROTTERDAM convention, has opened new horizons in marine transportation by using door-to-door way to carry goods and prevail electronic documents and also, setting the volumetric contracts.