FOB术语下无单放货问题研究

发布时间：2018-11-28 18:41

【摘要】：由于海运事业不断发展,提单已经成为收货人向承运人提货的主要依据。根据我国《海商法》以及相关的国际公约等的规定,承运人应当凭正本提单交货。但是,承运人凭保函和提单副本放货的现象在我国的贸易实践中屡见不鲜,这就就会产生大量的无单放货纠纷案件。据相关资料统计,东南亚国家70%以上、日本90%以上以及我国国内有些口岸90%的进口货物都存在无单放货的现象。而当前我国出口贸易领域使用FOB条款(中外货物买卖合同)的合同已达60%-70%。因此在理论和贸易实践中解决好FOB术语下的无单放货问题尤为重要。首先,该篇论文从无单放货产生的原因以及FOB术语下研究无单放货的意义出发,研究了国内外关于研究FOB术语下的无单放货的研究现状,确定了本篇论文的研究方法。其次,采用比较与归纳相结合的分析方法明确FOB术语下的无单放货及提单的法律性质,并对FOB术语的概念及合同履行流程做出细致交代。接着笔者进一步由FOB术语下责任归属的理论学说与合同关系明确FOB术语下的无单放货在不同情形下的责任归属以及承运人无单放货的免责事由。最后,由具体案件的处理过程中分析出FOB术语下无单放货的法律问题。提出具体的法律建议,并提出并由此提出笔者所倾向的学说——侵权违约责任竞合说。接着从实体和程序上两方面比较了侵权之诉和违约之诉之不同后,提出对于完善国内相关立法的建议。
[Abstract]:Due to the continuous development of shipping, bill of lading has become the main basis for consignee to collect goods from the carrier. According to China's Maritime Law and other relevant international conventions, the carrier should deliver the goods on the original bill of lading. However, the phenomenon of carrier delivering goods by guarantee and copy of bill of lading is common in our country's trade practice, which will lead to a large number of cases of undocumented delivery disputes. According to the statistics, more than 70% of Southeast Asian countries, more than 90% of Japan and 90% of our domestic ports of import goods, there is no bill of delivery phenomenon. At present, China's export trade uses FOB terms (Chinese and foreign goods sales contracts) contracts have reached 60-70. Therefore, in theory and trade practice, it is very important to solve the problem of non-bill delivery under FOB terminology. First of all, this paper starts from the reason of non-bill delivery and the significance of studying non-bill delivery under FOB terminology, studies the current situation of research on non-bill delivery under FOB terminology at home and abroad, and determines the research method of this paper. Secondly, the legal nature of undocumented delivery and bill of lading under FOB terminology is clarified by using the analysis method of comparison and induction, and the concept of FOB term and the process of contract performance are explained in detail. Then the author further clarifies the liability attribution under the FOB term and the contractual relationship between the theory and the contract. Under the FOB term, the liability attribution of the unbilled goods under different circumstances and the exemption of the carrier's delivery of the goods without the bill are clarified. Finally, the legal problem of non-bill delivery under FOB terminology is analyzed in the process of handling specific cases. Put forward the concrete legal suggestion, and put forward the doctrine that the author inclines from it-the theory of concurrence of tort liability for breach of contract. Then, the author compares the difference between tort action and breach of contract action from substantive and procedural aspects, and puts forward some suggestions to perfect the relevant domestic legislation.
【学位授予单位】：长春工业大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D922.294;D996.19

【参考文献】