论票据丧失及法律救济

发布时间：2018-03-28 18:28

本文选题：票据占有　切入点：票据丧失　出处：《延边大学》2007年硕士论文

【摘要】： 票据丧失是票据流转中的异常情况，票据作为设权证券和提示证券，丧失票据就丧失了行使票据权利的凭证，票据丧失后还经常伴随着一系列的程序问题和实体问题。由于票据法独特的技术规则，与民商法的一般理论存在较大差异，加上法规本身的抽象性，失票救济领域存在较多争议问题和模糊规定。民事诉讼法以列举方式界定票据丧失，既不够全面，，也难以明确丧失的构成要件。而搞清楚票据丧失的责任及风险的承担，研究在票据丧失的情况下，如何进行相应补救，如何更好地保护自己的权益，规避和转嫁风险，不仅是经济界，法律界人士需要解决的问题，而且是每个票据关系参加者都急切关注的问题。以往，关于票据丧失及补救的诸多研究多侧重于对票据权利人丧失票据的情况进行研究，各国法律也多从法律制度上为票据权利人设置一些救济方法和程序。但是，现实生活中，还存在着许多非票据权利人丧失票据的情况，以及对善意的第三人利益保护的问题，不对这些现象进行研究，不对这些特殊的利害关系人进行救济，不能不说是一种遗憾和缺漏。同时，由于票据法的博大精深，以及票据规则的特殊性、法律条文的抽象性等因素，票据丧失救济领域存在着争议多、法规语义模糊的问题。虽然近年理论界对票据法的研究不断增多，研究的程度也不断深入，票据法的专著和论文不断涌现，但就笔者搜集的现有资料看，学者对票据丧失的救济问题缺乏足够的重视，缺乏对票据丧失救济问题的系统研究，对此问题进行深入研究的也不够多。深化对票据丧失现象的认识，研究对各种丧失票据者的救济方法，不仅是必要的，而且是急需的。本文由绪论，票据丧失救济制度的一般原理，国际公约中的票据丧失救济制度及价值取向，我国对的票据丧失的救济，以及我国票据丧失救济制度的进一步完善和结论六章构成。全文主干分为四部分，从票据丧失救济制度的一般原理入手，对票据的占有及票据的丧失进行了分类并对相关问题进行了界定(第二章)。对与票据的丧失联系最为紧密的票据的伪造问题进行了研究。概述了国际公约中的票据丧失救济制度及价值取向，并以比较的方法分析了我国与英美法系和日内瓦统一票据法体系在制度规定上的主要区别(第三章)。从研究实体问题的角度，对我国的票据丧失救济制度及现存的规定模糊及争议问题进行评析。针对现实生活中，非票据权利人失去对票据直接控制的情形，探究对非票据权利人丧失票据的救济方法。深化对票据丧失现象的认识，研究对各种丧失票据者的失票救济途径，进而探析我国票据丧失的救济制度如何进一步完善的问题(第四章)。
[Abstract]:The loss of a bill is an abnormal situation in the circulation of a bill. The loss of the instrument, as an authorized security and a prompt security, results in the loss of the certificate of exercise of the right to the negotiable instrument. After the bill is lost, there are often a series of procedural and substantive problems. Due to the unique technical rules of the instrument law, there is a great difference from the general theory of civil and commercial law, and the abstract nature of the law itself. There are many controversial problems and vague provisions in the field of the relief of lost tickets. The Civil procedure Law defines the loss of instruments by enumeration, which is neither comprehensive nor clear about the constitutive elements of the loss, and makes clear the responsibility of the loss of bills and the bearing of risks. It is not only a problem for the economic and legal professionals to solve the problem of how to remedy the loss of bills, how to better protect their own rights and interests, and how to avoid and transfer risks. And it is a matter of urgent concern to every participant in the bill relationship. In the past, many studies on the loss and remedy of bills focused on the situation of bill holders losing their instruments, and the laws of various countries also set up some relief methods and procedures for the holders of bill rights from the legal system. In real life, there are still many cases of non-bill holders losing their instruments, and the problems of protecting the interests of bona fide third parties, not studying these phenomena, and not providing relief to these special interested parties. Can not but say is a kind of regret and omission. At the same time, due to the broad and profound bill law, as well as the particularity of the bill rules, the abstract nature of the legal provisions and other factors, there are many disputes in the field of bill loss relief. Although in recent years the theoretical circle has been increasing the research on the law of negotiable instruments, the degree of the study is also deepening, the monographs and papers on the law of instruments have been emerging constantly, but from the view of the existing data collected by the author, Scholars do not pay enough attention to the relief problem of bill loss, lack of systematic research on the relief problem of bill loss, and do not have enough in-depth research on this problem, so as to deepen the understanding of the phenomenon of bill loss. It is not only necessary, but also urgent, to study the remedies for the disenfranchised. This article is based on the introduction, the general principles of the bill loss relief system, the relief system and value orientation of the instrument loss in international conventions, and the relief of the bill loss in our country. The main body of this paper is divided into four parts, starting with the general principle of bill loss relief system. This paper classifies the possession and loss of the instrument and defines the related problems (Chapter II). The paper studies the counterfeiting of the instrument which is most closely related to the loss of the instrument, and summarizes the ticket in the international convention. According to the loss of relief system and value orientation, It also analyzes the main differences between our country and the common law system and the uniform instrument law system in Geneva (Chapter three) from the point of view of the study of substantive issues, and analyzes the main differences between China and the Anglo-American law system and the unified instrument law system in Geneva (Chapter three). This paper makes an analysis of the relief system of bill loss in our country and the existing fuzzy and controversial issues. In view of the real life, the non-bill holder loses direct control over the bill. To probe into the relief methods for non-bill holders to lose their bills, to deepen their understanding of the phenomenon of the loss of bills, and to study the ways to remedy the loss of bills for those who have lost their bills, And then analyze the problem of how to perfect the relief system of bill loss in China (Chapter IV).
【学位授予单位】：延边大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2007
【分类号】：D996.2;D922.287

【参考文献】