• Take advantage of our featured Black Friday/Cyber Monday deals

    LEARN MORE
  • Take advantage of our featured Black Friday/Cyber Monday deals

    LEARN MORE
This topic has expert replies
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 462
Joined: 19 Jan 2011
Thanked: 10 times
Followed by:4 members

PR - main point

by confuse mind » Fri Aug 03, 2012 8:42 pm
Despite quantum leaps in transportation technology in the twentieth century, laws regarding cargo found at sea have remained virtually unchanged since the seventeenth century. Flotsam (floating cargo from a shipwrecked vessel), jetsam (sunken cargo thrown overboard to lighten a distressed vessel), and lagan (discarded underwater cargo marked with a buoy for subsequent retrieval) all belong, according to maritime law, to the original owner no matter how long the cargo remain in the water. Discarded cargo of any type can be held for salvage; the owner may then claim it if they pay an equitable reward to the finder. If, after a reasonable time, the owners fail to appear, the salvager may claim the cargo as his or her own.

The advent of the airplane brought about a new legal dilemma: were salvage laws applicable to cargo retrieved from an airplane downed at sea? According to judicial decisions in the United States, such cargo is placed under appropriate maritime laws as long as it is found in navigable waters. But this should come as no surprise to students of American jurisprudence, since previous United States court rulings have absurdly applied salvage laws to money found on a body floating in a lake. No doubt future American judges will allow cargo salvaged in space to fall under these same laws.



The author of the passage is primarily concerned with


explaining a widely disputed point of law


refuting critics of current maritime law


tracing the origins of modern maritime law


describing a point of law and its modern applications


presenting a case against current maritime law



IMO - E OA - D Please explain

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 462
Joined: 19 Jan 2011
Thanked: 10 times
Followed by:4 members

by confuse mind » Fri Aug 03, 2012 8:47 pm
another question - same RC


The author of the passage concludes which of the following about current maritime law?


It has drawbacks that are far outweighed by its benefits.


It seems unlikely to change in the near future.


It will require complete revision if it is to remain useful.


It is no longer relevant in light of current technology.


It cannot be made to apply to space-age technology.


IMO - D OA - B