本文選題：鹿特丹規(guī)則 + 權(quán)利轉(zhuǎn)讓��； 參考：《西南政法大學(xué)》2011年碩士論文

【摘要】：歷時(shí)十幾年的《全部或部分海上國(guó)際貨物運(yùn)輸合同公約》被稱(chēng)為《鹿特丹規(guī)則》已于2008年12月11日在聯(lián)合國(guó)第63屆大會(huì)最終通過(guò),并于2009年9月23日在荷蘭鹿特丹舉行了簽字儀式。權(quán)利轉(zhuǎn)讓制度是《鹿特丹規(guī)則》較其之前的三個(gè)國(guó)際海上貨物運(yùn)輸領(lǐng)域已經(jīng)生效的國(guó)際公約新增加的一項(xiàng)法律制度。該制度的設(shè)立,對(duì)于澄清運(yùn)輸與貿(mào)易之間的聯(lián)系,協(xié)調(diào)運(yùn)輸法律與貿(mào)易法律之間的沖突,具有重大的理論和現(xiàn)實(shí)意義。有鑒于此,本文將針對(duì)國(guó)際海上貨物運(yùn)輸中的權(quán)利轉(zhuǎn)讓制度涉及的系列問(wèn)題展開(kāi)討論。 全文共分為五個(gè)部分,三萬(wàn)余字。 第一部分“緒論”主要介紹了權(quán)利轉(zhuǎn)讓制度的由來(lái)以及其存在的研究?jī)r(jià)值。筆者從英國(guó)《1855年提單法》到1922年制定的《海上貨物運(yùn)輸法》再到《鹿特丹規(guī)則》這個(gè)歷史脈絡(luò)的角度分析了權(quán)利轉(zhuǎn)讓問(wèn)題的由來(lái)。通過(guò)具體的案例分析提出了其存在的重大現(xiàn)實(shí)意義。 第二部分“權(quán)利轉(zhuǎn)讓中基本概念剖析”。在這一部分中,筆者通過(guò)對(duì)權(quán)利轉(zhuǎn)讓涵義和提單持有人概念的界定,對(duì)提單債權(quán)關(guān)系的重要性和有關(guān)其性質(zhì)的主要學(xué)說(shuō)進(jìn)行了系統(tǒng)的闡述,且分析了各學(xué)說(shuō)的優(yōu)弊,最后得出了自己的觀點(diǎn)。 第三部分“權(quán)利轉(zhuǎn)讓的規(guī)則”。在這一部分,筆者先是分析了權(quán)利轉(zhuǎn)讓的立法例,即權(quán)利義務(wù)轉(zhuǎn)讓異步型和權(quán)利義務(wù)轉(zhuǎn)讓同步型,然后從權(quán)利轉(zhuǎn)讓的成立和生效要件兩個(gè)方面分析了《鹿特丹規(guī)則》中權(quán)利轉(zhuǎn)讓的具體時(shí)間。 第四部分“權(quán)利轉(zhuǎn)讓的內(nèi)容”。該部分是本文的重點(diǎn)也是本文論述的難點(diǎn),筆者通過(guò)對(duì)條文的具體分析肯定了“可轉(zhuǎn)讓的權(quán)利”包括“提貨權(quán)”和“控制權(quán)”,接著闡述了這兩種權(quán)利的具體內(nèi)容。再通過(guò)對(duì)學(xué)說(shuō)上存在的“可轉(zhuǎn)讓的權(quán)利”還包括“物權(quán)”和“訴權(quán)”的觀點(diǎn)進(jìn)行了分析,得出了自己的觀點(diǎn)即《鹿特丹規(guī)則》中“可轉(zhuǎn)讓的權(quán)利”只包括“提貨權(quán)”和“控制權(quán)”。 第五部分“《鹿特丹規(guī)則》中權(quán)利轉(zhuǎn)讓制度對(duì)我國(guó)的借鑒意義”。在這一部分,筆者通過(guò)對(duì)我國(guó)《海商法》和《合同法》等法律關(guān)于權(quán)利轉(zhuǎn)讓問(wèn)題規(guī)定的分析,得出了我國(guó)對(duì)該問(wèn)題的立法現(xiàn)狀。在此基礎(chǔ)上,對(duì)我國(guó)《海商法》的修訂提出了幾點(diǎn)供參考的建議。 在研究方法上,本文主要運(yùn)用了歷史分析方法、比較法和實(shí)證分析法。在關(guān)于權(quán)利轉(zhuǎn)讓問(wèn)題的由來(lái)的論述上,筆者采用了歷史分析方法對(duì)這段歷史發(fā)展進(jìn)行了客觀的總結(jié)和分析,這有助于更加深入地解析權(quán)利轉(zhuǎn)讓法律問(wèn)題的內(nèi)涵。由于權(quán)利轉(zhuǎn)讓問(wèn)題和債的轉(zhuǎn)移、票據(jù)流通存在諸多相似點(diǎn),加上英美等國(guó)對(duì)權(quán)利轉(zhuǎn)讓問(wèn)題的規(guī)定較為成熟,因此本文的行文過(guò)程中較多運(yùn)用了比較分析方法進(jìn)行論述,以便借鑒其中成熟的理論和先進(jìn)的成果應(yīng)用于我國(guó)對(duì)此問(wèn)題的研究和立法實(shí)踐。海商法是一門(mén)實(shí)踐性較強(qiáng)的學(xué)科,因而筆者對(duì)國(guó)際海上貨物運(yùn)輸中涉及權(quán)利轉(zhuǎn)讓問(wèn)題的典型案例進(jìn)行了分析和總結(jié)。
[Abstract]:The Convention on contracts for the International Carriage of goods by Sea, which lasted for more than ten years, was finally adopted by the 63rd United Nations General Assembly on December 11, 2008, as the Rotterdam rules. A signing ceremony was held in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, on September 23, 2009. The transfer of rights system is a new legal system added to the Rotterdam rules compared with the three international conventions in force in the field of international carriage of goods by sea. The establishment of this system is of great theoretical and practical significance to clarify the relationship between transport and trade and to coordinate the conflict between transport law and trade law. In view of this, this paper will discuss a series of issues concerning the transfer of rights regime in the international carriage of goods by sea. The full text is divided into five parts, more than 30,000 words. The first part "introduction" mainly introduces the origin of the right transfer system and its existence research value. The author analyzes the origin of the transfer of rights from the perspective of the British Bill of Lading Act of 1855 to the Law on the Carriage of goods by Sea formulated in 1922 and to the Rotterdam rules. Through the concrete case analysis, it puts forward the great practical significance of its existence. The second part: analysis of the basic concepts in the transfer of rights. In this part, by defining the meaning of transfer of rights and the concept of holder of bill of lading, the author systematically expounds the importance of the creditor's rights relationship of bill of lading and the main theories about its nature, and analyzes the advantages and disadvantages of each theory. Finally, the author came to his own point of view. Part III "rules on the transfer of Rights". In this part, the author first analyzes the legislative example of the transfer of rights, that is, the asynchronous transfer of rights and obligations and the synchronous transfer of rights and obligations. Then the specific time of the transfer of rights in Rotterdam rules is analyzed from two aspects: the establishment and the effective requirements of the transfer of rights. The fourth part is the content of the transfer of rights. This part is the focal point of this article also is the difficulty which this article discusses, the author affirms "the transferable right" including "the right to pick up goods" and "the right of control" through the concrete analysis to the article, then elaborated the concrete content of these two kinds of rights. Through the analysis of the view that "transferable right" also includes "real right" and "right of action" in theory, The conclusion is that the "transferable right" in the Rotterdam rules includes only "right to pick up goods" and "right of control". Part five: the reference meaning of the transfer of Rights system in the Rotterdam rules to our country. In this part, through the analysis of the law of maritime law and contract law on the transfer of rights, the author obtains the current situation of legislation on this issue in our country. On this basis, some suggestions for the revision of Maritime Law of China are put forward. In the research method, this paper mainly uses the historical analysis method, the comparative method and the empirical analysis method. On the origin of the transfer of rights, the author uses the historical analysis method to sum up and analyze the historical development objectively, which is helpful to analyze the connotation of the legal issue of the transfer of rights. Due to the problem of transfer of rights and the transfer of debt, there are many similarities in negotiable instruments circulation, and the provisions on the transfer of rights in Britain and America are more mature, so the comparative analysis method is used in the course of this paper. In order to draw lessons from the mature theory and advanced achievements in our research and legislative practice. Maritime law is a practical subject, so the author analyzes and summarizes the typical cases involving the transfer of rights in the international carriage of goods by sea.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D996.19

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 姚瑩;;國(guó)際海上貨物運(yùn)輸中的權(quán)利轉(zhuǎn)讓問(wèn)題研究——以UNCITRAL《運(yùn)輸法公約(草案)》為視角[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2008年03期

2 司玉琢;UNCITRAL運(yùn)輸法(草案)難點(diǎn)問(wèn)題研究[J];大連海事大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2003年01期

3 董翠香;論票據(jù)權(quán)利的背書(shū)轉(zhuǎn)讓[J];河北法學(xué);2002年05期

4 吳煦;;提單之債性質(zhì)研究[J];昆明理工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2007年07期

5 孫朋;;簡(jiǎn)論UNCITRAL運(yùn)輸法草案中的權(quán)利轉(zhuǎn)讓[J];商場(chǎng)現(xiàn)代化;2006年09期

6 李學(xué)蘭;論提單權(quán)利證券化[J];法學(xué)論壇;2002年06期

7 王艷玲,王應(yīng)富;海上貨物運(yùn)輸合同下托運(yùn)人訴權(quán)問(wèn)題探究[J];中國(guó)海商法年刊;1998年00期

8 司玉琢,汪杰,祝默泉,沈曉平;關(guān)于無(wú)單放貨的理論與實(shí)踐——兼論提單的物權(quán)性問(wèn)題[J];中國(guó)海商法年刊;2000年00期

9 李志文;論提單持有人及其權(quán)利、義務(wù)和責(zé)任[J];中國(guó)海商法年刊;2001年00期

10 鄔先江,陳海波;論CMI運(yùn)輸法草案有關(guān)控制權(quán)的規(guī)定[J];中國(guó)海商法年刊;2001年00期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 謝靜;國(guó)際海上貨物運(yùn)輸中提單轉(zhuǎn)讓法律問(wèn)題研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2004年

2 李曉麗;提單轉(zhuǎn)讓相關(guān)法律問(wèn)題研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2007年

，

本文編號(hào)：1872309