中国在建船舶抵押权实现方式立法问题研究

发布时间：2018-04-20 13:56

本文选题：在建船舶抵押 + 在建船舶抵押权实现方式　；参考：《华东政法大学》2015年硕士论文

【摘要】：我国《海商法》规定“在建船舶”可以设立抵押,但对于“在建船舶”应当怎样设立抵押并没有任何规定。因此,我国在建船舶抵押权的实现仅能参照一般动产抵押权所规定的实现方式来实现,也就是说,我国在建船舶抵押权的实现主要存在以下两个途径:第一,抵押权人和抵押人之间就该在建船舶协议以折价拍卖变卖等方式实现;第二,当事人无约定的,通过法院拍卖该在建船舶实现抵押权。在我国司法实践中,在建船舶抵押权的实现大多也是通过司法拍卖的方式来实现。然而由于在建船舶价值“浮动”的特性,一般的抵押权实现方式很难能够满足在建船舶的特性从而最大程度上地体现在建船舶的价值。在考察国外立法后发现,英美法系国家并不承认可以在在建船舶上设立抵押权。在建船舶的抵押在实践中一般是在船厂对其所有资产设立浮动抵押时,被当作船厂的一项资产,被包含进去。因此,英美法系下对于在建船舶抵押权实现方式的立法并不能对于我国立法存在的问题提供直接的帮助。承认在建船舶设立抵押的其他国家并未对在建船舶和船舶的抵押实现方式做区分,而统一规定以强制拍卖方式实现。这样的规定与我国现行的立法模式相类似,同样存在没有考虑到在建船舶价值的浮动特性和处于建造状态特性的问题。虽然《1967年在建船舶权利登记公约》承认了在建船舶设立抵押的效力,但该公约并没有在在建船舶抵押权实现方面做具体的规定。因此,国外各国的立法也没能很好的解决这个问题,我们实有必要根据我国的法律体系及在建船舶抵押权的特点,设立全新的在建船舶抵押权实现方式。对于“在建船舶抵押权的实现方式”,学界的意见较为一致,都认为需要引进新的制度来解决该问题;不过,学界对于应当引入什么制度这一点上的看法并不相同,可分为:“浮动抵押接管人制度”、“让与担保制度”以及“以约定方式实现抵押权”。“浮动抵押接管人制度”运用在在建船舶抵押权的实现上有以下优势和劣势:优势有四点:其一,浮动抵押接管人制度能够很好地解决在建船舶本身的浮动性问题;第二,接管人被赋予的广泛权利能够最大程度地实现在建船舶的价值;其三,委任具有专业背景的接管人更有利于保护抵押权人的利益;此外,接管人制度的引入有利于完善我国的浮动抵押制度。而浮动抵押接管人制度的劣势则在于以下三点:其一,我国的接管人制度与《破产法》中破产管理人缺乏联系;其二,具体到规定设立层面会有具体的问题。此外,由于中英两国的法律体制及设计差异,若将其引入国内,尚存在许多问题需要解决。如果引入“让与担保制度”,则存在以下三个优势:其一,让与担保制度同样符合在建船舶浮动的特性;其二,让与担保制度简便的抵押权实现方式能够有效减少抵押权实现所需的费用;其三,在让与担保下,由于抵押权人获得抵押物的所有权,这能够有效的避免交易第三人的出现,因此抵押权人的利益将获得很好地保护。但不可否认的是,“让与担保制度”的引入也可能存在以下问题,其一,“让与担保制度”与我国已存的动产抵押制度存在功能冲突问题;此外,让与担保的运用还存在公示应当如何进行,与我国禁止“流质条款”的冲突应当怎样解决等问题。而“以约定方式实现抵押权的方式”虽然能够在一定程度上结合了“接管人制度”和“让与担保”制度的优势,同时这样的约定也避免了与我国现行的动产抵押制度的冲突。但通过约定方式实现在建船舶抵押权这样的规定是否需要上身到法律层面是一个值得讨论的问题;此外,在双方对于在建船舶担保实现问题上没有明确约定的情况下,应怎样具体操作,这也是值得我们思考和解决的问题。综合比较各国立法及上述三个制度,笔者认为,浮动抵押接管人制度”相较于“让与担保制度”更适合我国的法律体系。具体到我国在建船舶抵押权实现方式的立法构建而言,应当以“司法保护主义”和“自救主义”结合的模式来完成立法框架的构建。因此,我们应当以“浮动抵押接管人制度”作为在建船舶抵押权实现方式的一般兜底制度,同时允许当事人通过协议约定以“折价”或“司法拍卖”的方式来实现抵押权。就“浮动抵押接管人制度”的具体规定而言,笔者认为,应当给予抵押权人和法院任命接管人的权利,但抵押权人的任命需经法院的形式审查。同时,只有具备以下几点的人才能担任在建船舶抵押权的接管人:首先,其必须是具备船舶建造行业相应的知识和经验的个人或者是律师事务所或破产事务所等中介机构;此外,还应当约定存在以下情况时不能担任在建船舶抵押权的接管人:因故意犯罪受过刑事处罚,曾被吊销相关专业执业证书,与本案有利害关系及其他法院认为不适当的情形。在法院任命接管人时,可以参照英国法的相关规定,以类似于“行政令”的方式作出;而抵押权人任命的接管人则是在指派文件通过法院形式审查并送达被指派人后生效。被任命的接管人需要具备“公司代理人”、“公司被信托人”及“公司官员”等多重身份。在考虑接管人权利范围时,应当在考虑在建船舶抵押权特性的同时,综合参照《破产法》关于破产管理人的规定,此外,笔者认为“占有及接管公司财产”、“继续经营公司业务或商业并将其出售的权利”、“处分和重组的权利(主要包括出售运用企业及剥离)”这三项权利对于在建船舶抵押权的实现非常重要;而接管人对于抵押权人和抵押设立人的义务,则主要是诚实信用义务和忠实义务。在存在多个浮动抵押人时,应当允许其共同指派接管人或各自指派接管人。但在其各自指派接管人时,各接管人的行动范围应当明示。而对于后续建造资金的提供问题,可由抵押权人提供后续资金,当然增值部分的收益可由双方约定,在没有约定的情况下应由抵押权人(即资金提供人)享有。此外,为了使新的在建船舶抵押权实现方式引入后被充分地运用,我国的《物权法》的“浮动抵押制度”和《破产法》中的“管理接管人制度”的需要进行一定程度地调整。
[Abstract]:The maritime law of China stipulates that the mortgage can be set up in the construction of ships, but there is no regulation on how to set up the mortgage on the building of the ship. Therefore, the realization of the mortgage of the ship in our country can only be realized by reference to the realization mode stipulated in the general chattel mortgage right, that is, the realization of the mortgage of ships in our country is mainly realized. There are two ways in the following ways: first, between the mortgagee and the mortgagee, the ship agreement between the mortgagee and the mortgagor should be realized by the sale of the discount auction and so on. Second, the parties have no agreement to achieve the mortgage by the court auction. In the judicial practice of our country, the realization of the ship's mortgage right is mostly through the way of judicial auction. However, due to the characteristics of the "floating" of the ship's value, the general mortgage realization method is difficult to meet the characteristics of the ship building and the value of the ship built to the maximum extent. In practice, it is generally considered as an asset of the shipyard when the shipyard has set up a floating mortgage on all its assets. Therefore, the legislation on the realization of the mortgage of the ship under the Anglo American law system does not provide direct help to the existing problems in our legislation. There is no distinction between the way of mortgage implementation of the ships and ships built and the unified provision of compulsory auction. Such a provision is similar to the current legislative model in our country, and there is no consideration of the floating characteristics of the value of the ship and the characteristics of the state of construction in the construction of the ship, although the registration of the rights of ships is in the year of <1967. It has acknowledged the effect of setting up a mortgage on the building of ships, but the Convention does not make specific provisions on the realization of the mortgage of ships in construction. Therefore, the legislation of foreign countries can not solve this problem well. It is necessary to set up a brand new ship based on the legal system of our country and the characteristics of the construction of the ship mortgage. The realization mode of the right of pledge. For the "realization mode of the mortgage of the ship building", the academic circles are more consistent, and they all think that the new system should be introduced to solve the problem; however, the views on what system should be introduced in the academic circles are different, which can be divided into "floating mortgage receiver system", "transfer guarantee system" and The "floating mortgage receiver system" has the following advantages and disadvantages: the advantage has four points: first, the floating mortgage receiver system can solve the floating problem of the ship itself well; second, the broad rights given by the receiver can be the greatest. In addition, the introduction of the receiver system is beneficial to the improvement of the floating mortgage system in our country. The disadvantages of the system of the floating charge receiver are three points: one, the system of the receiver and the bankruptcy law in our country. In addition, there are many problems to be solved if the legal system and design differences between China and Britain are introduced into the country. If the "transfer guarantee system" is introduced, the following three advantages are the following: first, the transfer guarantee system is the same. Together with the characteristics of the floating of the ship, the second, the simple mortgage system of the transfer guarantee system can effectively reduce the cost of the mortgage. In the third, under the guarantee, the mortgright has acquired the ownership of the mortgage, which can effectively avoid the emergence of the third party, so the interests of the mortgaged will be very good. However, it is undeniable that the introduction of "transfer guarantee system" may also have the following problems. First, there is a functional conflict between the "transfer guarantee system" and the existing chattel mortgage system in China. Besides, how should the application of the transfer guarantee be carried out and the conflict with the prohibition of the "flow quality clause" in China While "the way to achieve the right of mortgage by agreement" can combine the advantages of the "receiver system" and "transfer guarantee" to a certain extent, at the same time, this agreement also avoids the conflict with the current chattel mortgage system in China. It is a question worth discussing whether the regulation needs to be from the upper body to the legal level. In addition, what specific operation should be done when both sides have no definite agreement on the realization of the construction of ship guarantee. This is a problem worth thinking and solving. A comprehensive comparison of national legislation and the above three systems, I think, floating mortgage The receiver system is more suitable for the legal system of our country than the "transfer guarantee system". In terms of the legislative construction of the mode of realizing the realization of the mortgage of ships in China, the legislative framework should be completed with the combination of "judicial protectionism" and "self salvation". Therefore, we should take the "floating mortgage receiver" as "the receiver of floating mortgage." As a general system for the realization of the realization of the mortgage of ships, the system allows the parties to achieve the mortgage by agreement by agreement "discount" or "judicial auction". In terms of the specific provisions of the "floating mortgage receiver system", the author thinks that the right to appoint the mortgaged and the court to appoint the receiver should be given. But the appointment of the mortgaged must be examined in the form of the court. At the same time, only a person with the following points can serve as the receiver of the mortgage of the ship building: first, it must be an intermediary with the relevant knowledge and experience of the shipbuilding industry, or a law firm or a breaking firm. In the case of the following case, the receiver of the mortgage of the building of the ship can not be taken as a receiver: a criminal penalty for intentional crime has been revoked of the relevant professional certificate of practice, and the case has an interest relationship with the case and the other courts think it is inappropriate. In the case of the court appointed the receiver, the relevant provisions of the British law may be referred to the party similar to the "administrative order". The receiver appointed by the mortgior is in effect after the assigned document is reviewed in the form of a court and sent to the assigned person. The appointed receiver needs to have a "company agent", "the company is the trustee" and the "company official", and so on. When considering the scope of the receiver's rights, the ship should be considered in the construction of the ship. In addition, the author considers that "possession and takeover of the property of the company", "the right to continue to operate the business or business and the right to sell it", "the right to dispose and reorganize", "the right to dispose and reorganize", the three rights for the construction of the ship The realization of the right of mortgage is very important; the liability of the receiver to the mortgagor and the mortgagor is mainly the honest and credit obligation and the duty of loyalty. In the presence of multiple floating mortgagor, the receiver should be allowed to jointly assign the receiver or to assign the receiver. It is clear that the issue of the provision of subsequent construction funds may be provided by the mortgaged, of course, the proceeds of the value-added part may be agreed by the two parties and should be enjoyed by the mortgaged (i.e. the fund provider) without the agreement. In addition, in order to make the new construction of the right of the ship's right to be introduced, it is fully applied. The "floating charge system" in the property law and the "management receiver system" in the bankruptcy law have been adjusted to some extent.

【学位授予单位】：华东政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D923.2

【相似文献】