【摘要】：由于全球經(jīng)濟(jì)一體化的發(fā)展,越來(lái)越多的跨國(guó)公司破產(chǎn),導(dǎo)致了一系列法律問(wèn)題的產(chǎn)生,比如國(guó)際破產(chǎn)管轄權(quán)、破產(chǎn)的域外效力、關(guān)于破產(chǎn)裁定的承認(rèn)與執(zhí)行等問(wèn)題。而管轄權(quán)問(wèn)題則是所有問(wèn)題中的重中之重,因?yàn)楫?dāng)一個(gè)公司宣布破產(chǎn)后,首先面臨的就是管轄權(quán)的問(wèn)題,這決定了一國(guó)法院的判決是否具有域外效力,是否能得到其他國(guó)家的承認(rèn)與執(zhí)行。國(guó)際破產(chǎn)在我國(guó)還是一個(gè)新興的領(lǐng)域,我國(guó)法律在國(guó)際破產(chǎn)管轄權(quán)方面的法律規(guī)定有很多的不足之處。由于世界各國(guó)在國(guó)際破產(chǎn)管轄權(quán)上的確定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)各不相同,再加上各國(guó)從保護(hù)本國(guó)利益出發(fā)來(lái)制定本國(guó)的法律,這就容易導(dǎo)致法律沖突的產(chǎn)生,所以本文就對(duì)國(guó)際破產(chǎn)管轄權(quán)這一問(wèn)題進(jìn)行深入的分析,以尋求解決國(guó)際破產(chǎn)管轄權(quán)沖突。 本文分為引言、正文、結(jié)語(yǔ)三個(gè)部分。 引言部分主要闡述近幾年來(lái),隨著全球經(jīng)濟(jì)一體化的發(fā)展,國(guó)際上國(guó)際破產(chǎn)案件的數(shù)量也呈上升趨勢(shì),我國(guó)也同樣遇到了很多的國(guó)際破產(chǎn)案件,但是我國(guó)在國(guó)際破產(chǎn)方面的法律規(guī)定還是存在很大的不足之處,法律上的規(guī)定還不健全。而且國(guó)際上目前在國(guó)際破產(chǎn)法律方面也沒(méi)有統(tǒng)一的法律規(guī)定,產(chǎn)生很多的法律沖突,因此對(duì)國(guó)際破產(chǎn)管轄權(quán)的研究勢(shì)在必行。 正文部分包括四章： 第一章對(duì)國(guó)際破產(chǎn)管轄權(quán)沖突及其確定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)進(jìn)行闡述。先從國(guó)際破產(chǎn)的界定入手,進(jìn)而對(duì)國(guó)際破產(chǎn)管轄權(quán)的概念和特點(diǎn)進(jìn)行詳細(xì)闡述,然后對(duì)國(guó)際上管轄權(quán)的確定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)進(jìn)行評(píng)析,進(jìn)而說(shuō)明了各國(guó)之間由于在管轄權(quán)確定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)上的差異而產(chǎn)生國(guó)際破產(chǎn)管轄權(quán)沖突。 第二章對(duì)國(guó)際破產(chǎn)管轄權(quán)的產(chǎn)生原因進(jìn)行闡述,了解沖突產(chǎn)生的深層次根源,并對(duì)國(guó)際破產(chǎn)管轄權(quán)沖突的協(xié)調(diào)問(wèn)題進(jìn)行闡述,對(duì)普及主義和地域主義兩種國(guó)際破產(chǎn)沖突的協(xié)調(diào)理論進(jìn)行詳細(xì)的評(píng)析,以尋求為國(guó)際破產(chǎn)管轄權(quán)沖突的解決提供一個(gè)理論指導(dǎo) 第三章闡述了聯(lián)合國(guó)國(guó)際貿(mào)易法委員會(huì)制定的《跨國(guó)破產(chǎn)示范法》及其歐美等國(guó)家在國(guó)際破產(chǎn)管轄權(quán)方面的法律規(guī)定和為尋求解決管轄權(quán)沖突問(wèn)題而作出的努力和積極探索,進(jìn)而詳細(xì)闡述國(guó)際破產(chǎn)管轄權(quán)解決的途徑,以此為我國(guó)在國(guó)際破產(chǎn)管轄權(quán)方面的立法及司法改革辦法提供一些借鑒。 第四章對(duì)我國(guó)國(guó)際破產(chǎn)管轄權(quán)的立法現(xiàn)狀及司法實(shí)踐進(jìn)行深入的分析,論述了我國(guó)在國(guó)際破產(chǎn)管轄權(quán)立法及司法方面的法律規(guī)定及實(shí)踐情況,與前邊三章遙相呼應(yīng),最終為我國(guó)在國(guó)際破產(chǎn)管轄權(quán)沖突的解決方面提出合理的建議。 結(jié)論概括了本文的基本觀(guān)點(diǎn),在解決國(guó)際破產(chǎn)管轄權(quán)方面,我國(guó)可以借鑒聯(lián)合國(guó)貿(mào)易法委員會(huì)制定的《跨境破產(chǎn)示范法》及《歐盟破產(chǎn)程序規(guī)則》的相關(guān)法律規(guī)定,采用主次破產(chǎn)程序管轄權(quán)的規(guī)定,并且不限制平行破產(chǎn),在我國(guó)處理國(guó)際破產(chǎn)案件的司法實(shí)踐中可以鼓勵(lì)采取個(gè)案協(xié)商解決的辦法來(lái)解決管轄權(quán)沖突的問(wèn)題。
[Abstract]:With the development of global economic integration, more and more multinational corporations are bankrupt, which leads to a series of legal problems, such as international bankruptcy jurisdiction, extraterritorial effect of bankruptcy, recognition and enforcement of bankruptcy rulings and so on. International bankruptcy is still a new field in our country. There are many shortcomings in the legal provisions of international bankruptcy jurisdiction in our country. There are different standards to determine the international bankruptcy jurisdiction, and each country formulates its own laws in order to protect its own interests. This will easily lead to conflicts of laws. Therefore, this paper makes an in-depth analysis of the issue of international bankruptcy jurisdiction in order to seek a solution to the conflicts of international bankruptcy jurisdiction.
This article is divided into three parts: introduction, main body and conclusion.
The introduction mainly elaborates that in recent years, with the development of global economic integration, the number of international bankruptcy cases is also on the rise, China has also encountered a lot of international bankruptcy cases, but China's international bankruptcy legal provisions are still very inadequate, legal provisions are not sound. At present, there is no uniform legal provisions in the international bankruptcy law, resulting in a lot of legal conflicts, so it is imperative to study the international bankruptcy jurisdiction.
The main body consists of four chapters.
Chapter one expounds the conflict of international bankruptcy jurisdiction and its determination criteria. Starting with the definition of international bankruptcy, the concept and characteristics of international bankruptcy jurisdiction are elaborated in detail, and then the determination criteria of international bankruptcy jurisdiction are evaluated, and the differences between countries in the determination criteria of international bankruptcy jurisdiction are explained. Conflicts arise in international bankruptcy jurisdiction.
Chapter two expounds the causes of the international bankruptcy jurisdiction, understands the deep-seated causes of the conflicts, expounds the coordination of the conflicts of the international bankruptcy jurisdiction, and makes a detailed analysis of the coordination theories of the two international bankruptcy conflicts: universalism and regionalism, in order to seek a solution to the conflicts of the international bankruptcy jurisdiction. Provide a theoretical guide.
Chapter Three expounds the Model Law on Transnational Insolvency enacted by the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law and its legal provisions on international bankruptcy jurisdiction in Europe and the United States, as well as the efforts and positive exploration made to seek a solution to the conflict of jurisdiction, and then elaborates on the ways to resolve the international bankruptcy jurisdiction in detail, so as to serve our country. The legislative and judicial reform methods in the field of bankruptcy jurisdiction provide some reference.
Chapter Four makes an in-depth analysis of the legislative status and judicial practice of China's international bankruptcy jurisdiction, discusses the legal provisions and practice of China's international bankruptcy jurisdiction legislation and judicial aspects, echoes the previous three chapters, and finally puts forward reasonable suggestions for China to resolve the conflicts of international bankruptcy jurisdiction.
The conclusion summarizes the basic viewpoints of this paper. In resolving the international bankruptcy jurisdiction, China can learn from the relevant legal provisions of the Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency and the EU Rules of Insolvency Procedure formulated by UNCITRAL, adopt the provisions of the jurisdiction of primary and secondary bankruptcy proceedings, and do not restrict parallel bankruptcy to deal with international bankruptcy in China. In the judicial practice of property cases, it can be encouraged to adopt the method of case negotiation to solve the problem of jurisdictional conflict.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：河北經(jīng)貿(mào)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;D997

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前7條

1 孫文雪;周琳;;國(guó)際破產(chǎn)管轄問(wèn)題比較研究[J];濱州學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2009年01期

2 王淑敏,王秀芬;論國(guó)際民商事訴訟管轄權(quán)的消極沖突[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2004年06期

3 宋錫祥;;論歐盟跨國(guó)破產(chǎn)法[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2007年04期

4 杜中超;破產(chǎn)的域外效力與我國(guó)涉外破產(chǎn)法的完善[J];河南師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);1997年04期

5 張玲;跨國(guó)破產(chǎn)國(guó)際合作的框架——聯(lián)合國(guó)跨界破產(chǎn)示范法述評(píng)[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)論壇;2004年22期

6 樊茂勇,楊彩霞;試析美國(guó)國(guó)際私法管轄權(quán)中的法經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)問(wèn)題[J];山西師大學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2000年04期

7 郭德香;淺議破產(chǎn)宣告的域外效力[J];河南省政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2003年03期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 王曉瓊;跨境破產(chǎn)中的法律沖突問(wèn)題研究[D];華東政法學(xué)院;2006年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前7條

1 王佐發(fā);跨國(guó)破產(chǎn)的法律沖突與法律適用[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2004年

2 楊?lèi)偓?跨國(guó)破產(chǎn)的管轄權(quán)問(wèn)題研究[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2005年

3 黃誠(chéng);論跨國(guó)破產(chǎn)的域外效力[D];中國(guó)海洋大學(xué);2006年

4 于文娟;跨國(guó)破產(chǎn)管轄權(quán)沖突及其解決途徑[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2007年

5 郭黎光;涉外民商事管轄權(quán)沖突探析[D];大連海事大學(xué);2007年

6 董建;跨國(guó)破產(chǎn)的國(guó)際私法問(wèn)題研究[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2009年

7 王寧;跨境破產(chǎn)管轄權(quán)問(wèn)題探究[D];廈門(mén)大學(xué);2009年

，

本文編號(hào)：2206742