伪造票据背书法律问题研究

发布时间：2018-07-12 08:24

本文选题：票据 + 伪造背书　；参考：《北方工业大学》2004年硕士论文

【摘要】： 本文采比较分析和历史分析的研究方法，，针对当前票据往来中常见的伪造背书问题作以探讨，希望能在体现票据法秩序、自由、公正和效益的同时，合理设计伪造背书中的相关制度。在第一章中就伪造背书的构成要件、分类及与相关概念的区别加以介绍，着重对票据背书行为中的无代行权人代行签章是按无权代理抑或伪造背书处理，何者更为可行?票据上签名的方式是否应该包括艺名、别名?并将票据法与刑法上对伪造背书问题的差别规定加以明晰，指明本文仅从票据法角度进行相关阐述。第二章回望了自伪造背书现象出现至今，有关的各种理论学说及法律规制；世界各国在处理该问题上由统一到分歧，直至两大票据法体制的最终形成历程；以及两大体制在处理伪造背书上各自的一般原则和例外规定；最后介绍《联合国国际汇票、国际本票公约》对两者的调和等。第三章比较两大票据法体制对伪造票据背书相关当事人权利责任的规定，介绍有关追认、禁反言、表见代理的适用对被伪造人权责的影响。文章对伪造背书的行为应否采用追认制度作以讨论，并讨论了在何种场合可以适用表见代理制度。第四章探讨伪造背书的损失不能追回的风险如何在相关当事人间分配才更符合公平正义的法律价值理念，文章对KILDOR-HICKS理论、责任分层理论、损失分配理论分别加以介绍，并对各理论的优缺点详加评判、分析论证。并提出本文观点：损失应该在付款人、被伪造人、直接后手之间进行分配，而不是统一商法中所说的只限于付款人和伪造人。第五章对我国现行有关票据的立法中存在的冲突及不可行性进行剖析，对最高人民法院所作的有关“重大过失”的司法解释提出质疑，文章并阐释了自己对“重大过失”的概念内涵、界定标准的理解。
[Abstract]:In this paper, comparative analysis and historical analysis are adopted to discuss the common problems of forged endorsement in the current exchange of bills, in the hope of reflecting the order, freedom, justice and efficiency of the negotiable instrument law. Reasonable design of forgery endorsement in the relevant system. In the first chapter, the author introduces the constitutive elements, classification and the difference between forged endorsements and related concepts. What is the more feasible way to deal with the signature of unauthorized agent or forgery endorsement in the act of endorsing bills? Should the signature on the bill include a stage name or alias? The paper clarifies the difference between the bill law and the criminal law on the issue of forgery endorsement, and points out that this article is only expounded from the angle of negotiable instrument law. The second chapter looks back at the phenomenon of forgery endorsement since the appearance of various theories and legal regulations; the world over in dealing with this issue from unity to disagreement until the final formation of the two major negotiable instruments law system. The general principles and exceptions of the two systems in dealing with forged endorsements are also introduced. Finally, the reconciliation of the UN International Bills of Exchange and the International promissory Notes Convention is introduced. The third chapter compares the provisions of the two law systems on the rights and responsibilities of the parties involved in the endorsement of forged bills, and introduces the effects of the application of ratification, estoppel and apparent agency on the rights and responsibilities of the forgeries. This paper discusses whether the act of forgery endorsement should adopt the system of ratification, and discusses the circumstances in which the system of apparent agency can be applied. Chapter four discusses how the risk of loss can not be recovered by forgery endorsement in order to accord with the legal value of fairness and justice. This paper introduces the theory of KILDOR-HICKS, the theory of liability stratification, and the theory of loss distribution, respectively. The merits and demerits of each theory are evaluated and analyzed. The point of view of this paper is that the loss should be distributed between the payer, the counterfeited and the direct hindhand, rather than be limited to the payer and the forger in the uniform commercial law. The fifth chapter analyzes the conflicts and infeasibility of the current legislation on bills in China, and challenges the judicial interpretation of "gross negligence" made by the Supreme people's Court. The article also explains the connotation of gross negligence and the definition of standards.
【学位授予单位】：北方工业大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2004
【分类号】：D912.28

【相似文献】