论票据权利义务

发布时间：2018-04-30 04:17

本文选题：票据权利 + 持票人　；参考：《中外法学》1999年06期

【摘要】：正无论在民商分立还是民商合一的法律体系中,理论上大都认为票据法属于商法范畴。民法与商法之间的分野在今天远不如在18、19世纪那么显著,但在根本价值取向上的不同仍不能被忽略。如果民法追求的目标是“自由、平等、博爱”,那么,商法追求的则应当是“自由、平等、营利”。正是由于这一根本区别,商法上的权利与民法上的权利无论在取得、转让、消灭以及法律保护的措施等等方面都有各自的特点。在我国近几十年的法律实践中,票据法相对于其他商事法来讲,是离人们日常生活较远的一部法律;相对于民法来讲,人们更容易接受民法传播的法律意识。在处理票据纠纷时,很容易将民法的观念强加在票据法上,审判结果难免偏颇。本文试图把票据权利义务的基本理念、票
[Abstract]:Whether in the legal system of the separation of civil and commercial enterprises or the integration of civil and commercial law, it is generally considered in theory that the law of negotiable instruments belongs to the category of commercial law. The distinction between civil law and commercial law is far less striking today than it was in the 1800s, but the difference in fundamental value orientation cannot be ignored. If the goal of civil law is "freedom, equality, fraternity", then the pursuit of commercial law should be "freedom, equality, profit." It is precisely because of this fundamental difference that the rights in commercial law and in civil law have their own characteristics in terms of acquisition, transfer, elimination and legal protection measures. In the legal practice of our country in recent decades, compared with other commercial laws, the negotiable instrument law is a law far away from people's daily life; compared with civil law, people are more receptive to the legal consciousness of the spread of civil law. In dealing with bill disputes, it is easy to impose the idea of civil law on the negotiable instrument law, and the trial result is inevitably biased. This paper tries to put the basic idea of rights and obligations of bill, ticket
【作者单位】：北京大学法学院
【分类号】：D922.287

【相似文献】