MASTER EXAM ORAL QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS BY CAPT-SUNDARAM - LATEST QUESTIONS
Merchant Shipping (Cancellation or Suspension of Certificate of Competency) Rules, 2003
Grounds for cancellation or Suspension of Certificates of Competency by Chief Examiner of Master & Mates or Chief Examiner of Engineers--
Any Certificate of Competency, which has been granted by the Central Government or an officer duly authorized by it in this behalf, to any person may be cancelled or suspended for any specified length of period by the Chief Examiner of Master and Mates or the Chief Examiner of Engineers, on the following circumstances :--
Incompetency, omission or commission of such acts by the holder of the Certificate, which may lead to personal injury, death or shipping casualty.
If it is found that the said person is guilty of any gross act of misconduct, drunkenness or tyranny, or in a case of collision, has failed to render assistance, or to give such information, or that the loss, stranding or abandonment of, or damage to any ship, or loss of life has been caused by his wrongful act or default.
Enquiry into misconduct/incompetency-
The cancellation or suspension of Certificate of Competency shall be made only after enquiry by the Chief Examiner or an authorized Officer on his behalf.
Issue of show cause notice---
No order shall be passed for cancellation or suspension of certificates unless the person concerned has been given a reasonable opportunity of giving representation against the proposed order through appropriate show cause notice.
Provision for appeal against order of cancellation/suspension---
A person whose certificate has been cancelled or suspended may appeal against such order to the Director General of Shipping within 30 days from the date of receipt of such order canceling or suspending his Certificate of Competency. The decision of the Director General of Shipping shall be final.
Q. 9) What are the various charter party clauses ? exp both to blame collosion clause , sue & labour clauseX
Ships A and B collide in American waters. Ship A is the cargo-carrying ship, ship B the non-carrying
ship. Ship A is held by a US court to be 60% to blame for the collision, and ship B 40% to blame. Shipper A loses
$1000 worth of cargo damaged on ship A, but cannot claim against the owners, who are protected by their bill of
lading terms (incorporating the Hague-Visby Rules). Shipper S is allowed to claim the entire $1000 from the owners
of the non-carrying ship B. But Ship B is only 40% to blame, so her owners can claim $600 back from the owners of ship A. The net effect is that the owners of ship A, while in no way contractually liable to shipper S, must pay 60%
of Sâ€™s loss.