發(fā)布時間：2018-04-27 23:01

  本文選題：承運人 + 副本提單��； 參考：《哈爾濱工業(yè)大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：伴隨著商貿(mào)往來的加強，承運人依據(jù)正本提單放貨已經(jīng)成為航運中必須遵守的一項準(zhǔn)則。但在實踐中，由于各種原因的影響，收貨人憑副本提單向承運人提貨現(xiàn)象變得十分普遍。這種做法不僅損害了正本提單持有人的利益，而且極大破壞了海上貨物貿(mào)易運輸制度，導(dǎo)致案件糾紛不斷發(fā)生。針對目前實踐中，收貨人憑副本提單提貨這一普遍情形，從國際和國內(nèi)兩種視覺角度，通過承運人這一關(guān)鍵因素對副本提單效力進行研究。 在大量采用規(guī)范分析、歸納分析等分析方法的基礎(chǔ)上，從國際和國內(nèi)現(xiàn)行有關(guān)提單的公約、法律法規(guī)出發(fā)，對承運人項下副本提單效力問題進行系統(tǒng)的分析和探討。最初以提單效力為著手點，進而對副本提單效力進行分析，經(jīng)過考察發(fā)現(xiàn)副本提單具有證明效力、債權(quán)效力。于是，設(shè)想進一步對副本提單放貨與承運人責(zé)任進行分析。在不同的條件下，是否允許承運人憑副本提單放貨，各國法律及國際公約中均有不同規(guī)定，特別是《鹿特丹規(guī)則》中體現(xiàn)的尤為明顯。同時，在承運人放貨后應(yīng)承擔(dān)的責(zé)任、歸責(zé)原則、范圍等細節(jié)方面，國內(nèi)學(xué)術(shù)界中存在著不同學(xué)說，而目前我國國內(nèi)法也僅提供了可供思考的法律要素，并未做出明確、具體的闡述。因此，在分析過后得出觀點，我國司法實踐中承運人因副本提單放貨應(yīng)承擔(dān)以違約為主，競合為輔的民事責(zé)任；另外，在歸責(zé)原則和賠償范圍方面《鹿特丹規(guī)則》比我國國內(nèi)法的規(guī)定更為合理，更有助于此類問題的解決。針對之前分析中存在的相關(guān)問題，承運人副本提單放貨應(yīng)從不同主體出發(fā)，以事前預(yù)防和事后救濟兩方面為中介，全面、仔細尋找解決方法與對策�；�于以上對承運人副本提單放貨問題的研究得出最終結(jié)論：根據(jù)目前已有的國際及國內(nèi)法律，我們應(yīng)當(dāng)堅持承運人憑正本提單放貨這個大原則，但是在某些特殊的情況下應(yīng)當(dāng)允許副本提單放貨。 在對承運人項下副本提單效力進行探索之后，，提出的一些觀點及思考，希望可以拓展此類問題的研究視角。通過對承運人性質(zhì)的界定，來降低審判的難度，明確當(dāng)事人之間的法律關(guān)系、保護當(dāng)事人的合法權(quán)益。
[Abstract]:With the strengthening of trade, the carrier's delivery of goods based on the original bill of lading has become a standard to be observed in shipping. However, in practice, it is very common for consignee to collect goods from carrier by duplicate bill of lading due to various reasons. This practice not only damages the interests of the original bill of lading holders, but also greatly undermines the system of trade in goods by sea. In view of the general situation that consignee takes delivery of goods by duplicate bill of lading in current practice, the validity of duplicate bill of lading is studied through the key factor of carrier from both international and domestic perspectives. On the basis of a large number of analytical methods, such as normative analysis, inductive analysis and so on, this paper makes a systematic analysis and discussion on the validity of the replica bill of lading under the category of carrier on the basis of international and domestic conventions, laws and regulations on bill of lading. At first, the validity of the bill of lading is taken as the starting point, and then the validity of the duplicate bill of lading is analyzed. Therefore, it is envisaged to further analyze the shipping of the duplicate bill of lading and the liability of the carrier. Under different conditions, whether the carrier is allowed to release the goods against a duplicate bill of lading has different provisions in various countries' laws and international conventions, especially in the Rotterdam rules. At the same time, in the details of the carrier's liability, liability principle, scope and so on, there are different theories in the domestic academic circles, but at present, the domestic law of our country has only provided the legal elements for consideration, which has not been made clear. A specific exposition. Therefore, after the analysis of the point of view, in judicial practice in our country, the carrier should bear the civil liability of breach of contract as the basis for the delivery of the duplicate bill of lading. The Rotterdam rule is more reasonable than the domestic law in the principle of imputation and the scope of compensation, and it is more helpful to solve this kind of problem. In view of the related problems existing in the previous analysis, the carrier's duplicate bill of lading should proceed from different subjects, take the two aspects of pre-prevention and post-relief as the intermediary, and look for the solutions and countermeasures carefully. Based on the above study of the carrier's duplicate bill of lading, the final conclusion is drawn: according to the existing international and domestic laws, we should adhere to the carrier's principle of delivery of goods on the basis of the original bill of lading. However, in certain special circumstances, a duplicate bill of lading should be allowed to release the goods. After exploring the validity of the duplicate bill of lading under the carrier line, this paper puts forward some viewpoints and thoughts, hoping to expand the research angle of this kind of problem. By defining the nature of carrier, we can reduce the difficulty of trial, clarify the legal relationship between the parties, and protect the legitimate rights and interests of the parties.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：哈爾濱工業(yè)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D996

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前8條

1 林志強;論承運人無單放貨的法律責(zé)任[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2002年05期

2 李勤昌;;提單的若干概念及其法律問題[J];國際商務(wù)(對外經(jīng)濟貿(mào)易大學(xué)學(xué)報);2010年01期

3 王明嚴(yán);;承運人無單放貨行為的博弈分析[J];黑龍江對外經(jīng)貿(mào);2010年01期

4 遲君德;“無單放貨”的法律性質(zhì)[J];集裝箱化;2003年09期

5 張旭;;淺析提單的物權(quán)效力[J];科協(xié)論壇(下半月);2007年04期

6 塔利莉;;承運人無正本提單交付貨物責(zé)任性質(zhì)研究[J];前沿;2011年04期

7 楊良宜,田正大;無提單交貨[J];中國海商法年刊;1994年00期

8 任蘇娟;;淺談無單放貨法律的發(fā)展[J];知識經(jīng)濟;2011年16期

本文編號：1812718