本文關(guān)鍵詞： 公安機關(guān) 凍結(jié) 銀行承兌匯票　出處：《蘭州大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：本文通過案例的分析,針對其中引發(fā)了六個爭議性法律問題：一是公安機關(guān)能否凍結(jié)銀行承兌匯票?二是銀行能否協(xié)助公安機關(guān)凍結(jié)止付銀行承兌匯票?三是銀行承兌匯票被公安機關(guān)凍結(jié)止付后,銀行能否拒絕持票人承兌銀行承兌匯票?四是銀行在公安機關(guān)解除銀行承兌匯票凍結(jié)后,是否有及時告知持票人的義務(wù)?五是持票人的銀行承兌匯票被公安機關(guān)凍結(jié)止付后,將采取什么措施維護自己的合法權(quán)利?六是公安部門凍結(jié)銀行承兌匯票和法院凍結(jié)銀行承兌匯票的區(qū)別?通過對這六個問題的分析,闡述了作者的觀點。在此基礎(chǔ)上,提出了八條建議,一是建議擴大法律、法規(guī)、司法解釋中關(guān)于公安機關(guān)凍結(jié)銀行承兌匯票等票據(jù)的范圍；二是建議銀行在進(jìn)行程序?qū)彶闀r,有權(quán)拒絕公安機關(guān)等有關(guān)部門的違規(guī)凍結(jié)行為；三是建議銀行和公安機關(guān)就拒絕承兌銀行承兌匯票責(zé)任問題承擔(dān)協(xié)商達(dá)成協(xié)議；四是銀行在公安機關(guān)解除銀行承兌匯票凍結(jié)后,有及時告知持票人的承兌義務(wù)；五是持票人對公安機關(guān)違法凍結(jié)行為,建議可以和銀行聯(lián)手向同級人民檢察院申訴、同級人大常委會申訴、同級的公安部門或上級公安部門申訴；六是公安機關(guān)通過合法程序凍結(jié)了銀行承兌匯票后,有及時告知義務(wù)；七是公安機關(guān)內(nèi)部法制部門做好把關(guān)和監(jiān)督工作；八是法院在受理持票人起訴銀行的案件中,不同的法院有不同的判決,以后,各地法院應(yīng)該統(tǒng)一標(biāo)準(zhǔn),有利于維護法律的尊嚴(yán)。
[Abstract]:This article through the case analysis, has caused six controversial legal questions: first, whether the public security organ can freeze the bank acceptance bill? Second, can banks help public security organs freeze bank acceptance bills? Third, after the bank acceptance bill is frozen by the public security organs to stop payment, can the bank refuse to accept the bank acceptance bill? Fourth, is it the obligation of the bank to inform the holder of the bill in time after the public security organ removes the freezing of the bank acceptance bill? Fifth, after the holder's bank acceptance bill is frozen by the public security organs to stop payment, what measures will be taken to safeguard his legal rights? Six is the difference between freezing bank acceptance draft by public security department and freezing bank acceptance bill by court? Through the analysis of these six issues, this paper expounds the author's views. On this basis, it puts forward eight suggestions, one is to propose the expansion of laws and regulations. In judicial interpretation, the scope of public security organs freezing bank acceptance bills and other instruments; Second, it is suggested that banks should have the right to refuse the illegal freezing of public security organs and other relevant departments when carrying out the procedure examination; Third, it is suggested that the bank and the public security organ should reach an agreement through consultation on the responsibility of refusing to accept the bill of exchange. Fourth, the bank has timely informed the holder of the acceptance obligation after the public security organ lifted the freezing of the bank acceptance bill; Fifth, the holder of the ticket against the illegal freezing of public security organs, suggest that they can join hands with the bank to appeal to the people's Procuratorate at the same level, the standing Committee of the people's Congress at the same level, the public security department at the same level or the public security department at the higher level. Sixthly, the public security organ has the obligation to inform the bank promptly after freezing the bank acceptance bill through the legal procedure; Seventh, the internal legal department of the public security organs should do a good job of supervision and supervision; Eighth, different courts have different judgments in accepting the cases of bearer suing the bank. After that, the local courts should unify the standards and help to safeguard the dignity of the law.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：蘭州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D922.1;F832.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前2條

1 汪世虎;論票據(jù)行為的無因性[J];海南大學(xué)學(xué)報(人文社會科學(xué)版);2003年03期

2 夏林林;對票據(jù)無因性原則法律適用的思考[J];法律適用;2004年01期

，

本文編號：1483470