论装货开始前航次租船合同当事人的解约权及其相关问题

发布时间：2018-06-04 04:38

本文选题：解约权 + 预期违约　；参考：《上海海运学院》2001年硕士论文

【摘要】： 航次租船合同是合同领域一种比较特殊的法律现象。其构成较具特色又极具国际性的海商法律与惯例体系的一部分，同时又受到各国合同法规定的调整及合同自由原则的影响，因此，包含很多比较复杂的法律问题。本文论述的焦点，航次租船合同当事人的解约权即为其中之一。同时，因为航次租船合同下船舶驶往装货港装货开始前的履行阶段极具航次租船合同的特点并较易产生各种争议，本文的讨论主要集中在这一阶段。另外，在论述的方法上，本文除了一般的叙述与议论外，主要比较了我国与英国在这一领域法律规定的异同，前者是我国的国内法，而后者，应该说，由于众所周知的各种原因，代表了国际上在这个领域的主流观点。本文可以分为五个部分，分别构成了本文主体的五章。第一章论述了英国法与中国法下行使解约权的依据。在这两国法律下，，合同当事人行使解约权的依据都可分为法定与约定两种。后者来自于合同当事人在合同中的约定，而前者则来自于法律的直接规定。无论是英国法还是中国法，解约权的法定依据主要都来自于合同一方的根本违约或是预期违约，但是两国的法律规定在这个问题上仍是存在较大区别的，这也必然地影响到了两国法律在航次租船合同当事人的解约权这一问题上的不同观点。第二章主要介绍了航次租船合同双方当事人各自在合同下应履行的义务。作为权利与义务的统一体，要了解航次租船合同当事人解除合同的权利，就必须首先明确他们在合同下应承担的义务。第三章从上两章所论述的内容出发，逐一讨论了装货开始前航次租船合同当事人的各种违约行为与解约权之间的关系，并对中国法与英国法在同一问题上的规定作出了比较。总的看来，当一方当事人违反了其在航次租船合同下应履行的某一义务，是否会赋予对方当事人解除合同的权利，从大原则上来看，无论是中国法还是英国法，违约行为后果的严重程度都会是最重要的考虑因素。但是由于海事法律以及航次租船合同本身的特殊性，情况也并不完全是这样。第四章致力于讨论一个比较特殊的法律问题，即，在承租人迟延提供或不提供约定的货物装船的情况下，出租人如何才能获得解约权。中国法和英国法下对这个问题都是适用各自合同法律领域的原则和规定来解决。然而，由于中英两国合同法律上一些具体规定的不同，在两国法律下分别解决这一问题的途径也有相当大的差别。论装货开始前航次租船合同当事人的解约权及其相关问题第五章则是关于航次租船合同当事人约定依据下的解约权问题。在航次租船合同领域，使用最普遍也是最重要的约定依据下的解约权来自于合同中的解约条款。可以说，在英国法下，这完全是个合同问题：而在中国法下，由于中国《海商法》第97条的规定采纳了解约条款的实际内容，因此，中国法下的这种解约权也获得了法定的依据。在这一章，本文还讨论了与解约条款相关的一系列问题。
[Abstract]:The voyage charter contract is a special legal phenomenon in the field of contract. It constitutes a part of the legal and Customary System of maritime business, which is characteristic and international. It is also influenced by the adjustment of contract law and the principle of freedom of contract. Therefore, it contains many complicated legal problems. The focus of this article is the focus of this article. The settlement right of the parties to the sub charter party is one of them. At the same time, the discussion of this article is mainly focused on this stage because of the characteristics of the voyage charter contract before loading port before loading port under the voyage charter contract. In addition, the similarities and differences between China and the United Kingdom in this field are compared. The former is the domestic law of our country and the latter, which should be said to represent the mainstream view of the world in this field because of all kinds of reasons.
This article can be divided into five parts, forming the five chapter respectively.
The first chapter discusses the basis of the right to release the contract under the British law and the Chinese law. Under the laws of the two countries, the party's basis for the exercise of the right of dissolution can be divided into two types of statutory and agreement. The latter comes from the contract parties' agreement in the contract, while the former comes from the direct provisions of the law. The legal basis of the right is mainly from the fundamental breach of contract or the expected breach of contract, but the legal provisions of the two countries are still very different on this issue, which also inevitably affects the different views of the two countries' law on the right of the parties to the voyage charter party.
The second chapter mainly introduces the obligations of both parties in the voyage charter contract under the contract. As a unity of rights and obligations, it is necessary to understand the rights of the parties to the contract of the voyage charter party to clear the obligations under the contract.
The third chapter, starting from the contents of the previous two chapters, discusses the relationship between the various parties' breach of contract and the right to resolve the contract before the beginning of loading, and compares the provisions of the Chinese law with the British law on the same issue. In general, when one party violates the execution of the charter party under the voyage contract Whether or not a certain obligation will give the party the right to dissolve the contract, from a large principle, whether it is the Chinese law or the British law, the severity of the consequences of the breach will be the most important consideration. However, the situation is not exactly the case because of the particularity of the maritime law and the voyage charter party itself.
The fourth chapter is devoted to the discussion of a special legal question, that is, how can the lessor obtain the right to release the contract when the lessee has delayed or does not provide the agreed shipment. Under the Chinese law and the British law, the problem is solved by the principles and regulations applicable to the respective legal fields of the contract. However, because of the two countries, China and Britain There are also quite different ways to solve this problem separately under the two countries' laws.
On the right of cancellation of the parties involved in voyage charter party before loading and related issues
The fifth chapter deals with the issue of termination right under the agreement of the parties engaged in voyage charter party.
The most common and important agreement in the same field is the termination right under the contract.
It can be said that under the English law, this is completely a contract problem: under the Chinese law, because of China's maritime law,
The ninety-seventh provision adopted the actual content of the rescission clause, so the right to rescission under the Chinese law was also obtained.
In this chapter, we also discuss a series of problems related to the dissolution clause.
【学位授予单位】：上海海运学院
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2001
【分类号】：D913

【引证文献】