عنوان مقاله [English]
In this study, the civil responcble of the shipmaster, hereafter master, in Iranian maritime law, Hague convention, and Rotrdom convention are studed and compared. Althou, Iran approved its maritme law in full compliance with Hague Treaty, hence, it never joined subsequent maritime treaties, such as The HagueWiesbad, Hamburg and Rotterdam. Since the master is one of the maritime carrier brokers, any responsibility that he has is also transferred to the maritime carrier. There is a difference of view on the basis of the responsibility of the maritime carrier (and consequently, in many cases, the master) in the Hague Treaty; some find it to be faultbased and the others to liability. The second group's point of view is emphasized in this study. One of the highlights of current study is that Iranian maritime law, derived from Hague regulations, provides masters to be exempt unconventionally from some of his responsibilities, while In the Rotterdam Convention, by limiting the exemptions of the maritime carrier and clarifying the scope of his responsibilities, the rights of consignors are more complied with in the context of today's technical facts.