【摘要】：貨物控制權本來是國際貿易法上的規(guī)定,在《鹿特丹規(guī)則》之前簽訂的國際海上貨物運輸的公約中,包括《漢堡規(guī)則》、《海牙—維斯比規(guī)則》以及《國際貨物多式聯(lián)運公約》中,并沒有關于貨物控制權的規(guī)定。而《鹿特丹規(guī)則》則首次以專章的形式明確完整地規(guī)定了貨物控制權制度,第一次在有關海上貨物運輸的國際公約中引入貨物控制權及控制方的概念。這是對國際海上貨物運輸法律制度的重大完善,其意義是成功的實現(xiàn)了海上運輸法律制度與貨物貿易法律制度之間的斜街,雖然《鹿特丹規(guī)則》下的貨物控制權依然存在著許多實際性的操作問題,但是明確規(guī)定該權利還是具有很多積極意義的,例如形成海上運輸法律制度與國際貿易法律制度的橋梁,加強了賣方的救濟權利的保護,適應了國際貿易和海運方式的變革等等。 本文將從《鹿特丹規(guī)則》中關于貨物控制權的概念、法律性質入手,將貨物控制權和英美法系中的中途停運權進行比較,并且概括了《鹿特丹規(guī)則》規(guī)定貨物控制權的意義等等；緊接著,本文討論了《鹿特丹規(guī)則》中貨物控制權的主體和內容以及《鹿特丹規(guī)則》的行使和限制。 最后一部分,是關于我國相關法律的分析,我國并沒有專門的貨物控制權制度,只有在《合同法》第308條有類似于貨物控制權制度的規(guī)定,但是該規(guī)定過于簡陋,可操作性不高,筆者從立法和司法兩個角度進行分析,認為我國應該借鑒《鹿特丹規(guī)則》中的相關規(guī)定,引進貨物控制權制度。
[Abstract]:Control of goods, which was originally provided for in international trade law and included in the Convention on the International Carriage of goods by Sea, concluded prior to the Rotterdam rules, including the Hamburg rules, There is no provision for control of goods in the Hague-Visby rules and the International Convention on Multimodal Transport of goods. The Rotterdam rules, for the first time, clearly and completely prescribe the system of control of goods in the form of a special chapter. For the first time, the concept of control of goods and the controlling party are introduced into the international convention on the carriage of goods by sea. This is a major improvement of the legal system of the international carriage of goods by sea, and its significance is to successfully realize the oblique street between the legal regime of maritime carriage and the legal regime of trade in goods. Although there are still many practical operational problems with the control of goods under the Rotterdam rules, it is still very positive to specify this right, For example, the formation of a bridge between the legal system of maritime transport and the legal regime of international trade strengthens the protection of the seller's relief rights and adapts to the changes of international trade and maritime transport methods, and so on. Starting with the concept and legal nature of the right of control of goods in the Rotterdam rules, this paper compares the right of control of goods to the right of stoppage in the Anglo-American law system. And summed up the Rotterdam rules of control of the meaning of goods, and so on; Then, this paper discusses the subject and content of the control right of goods in Rotterdam rules, and the exercise and restriction of Rotterdam rules. The last part is about the analysis of the relevant laws of our country, China does not have a special system of control of goods, only in Article 308 of the contract Law there is a regulation similar to the system of control of goods, but this provision is too simple. The author analyzes it from the angle of legislation and judicature, and points out that China should draw lessons from the relevant provisions of Rotterdam rules and introduce the system of control of goods.
【學位授予單位】：華東政法大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2011
【分類號】：D996.19;D923.6;D922.294

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前5條

1 張曉蓮;;對貨物控制權制度的思考[J];法學與實踐;2010年03期

2 王麗;趙偉麗;;FOB條件下托運人的認定[J];法制與社會;2008年30期

3 祁長生;;FOB貿易術語下賣方如何規(guī)避風險[J];黑龍江對外經貿;2006年03期

4 劉昕;海運貨物控制權問題研究——兼評UNCITRAL運輸法草案第11章的規(guī)定[J];江蘇社會科學;2004年02期

5 費宏達;;《鹿特丹規(guī)則》視野下FOB條件下賣方之貨物控制權[J];遼寧行政學院學報;2010年04期

，

本文編號：2430783