票据被伪造人责任追究的最新研究

发布时间：2018-12-12 18:14

【摘要】：票据伪造情形中的伪造人和被伪造人,一般情况下都无需承担票据责任。在我国学界,这早已成为定论。不过,当出现表见伪造的情况时,被伪造人应当承担责任。可是该责任追究能否适用表见代理类推适用的方法得以解决这一问题值得研究。另外,当有被伪造人愿意追认时,被伪造人票据责任不得免除。问题是在票据伪造中,在被伪造人愿意追认的前提下,追认的对象是什么。进而,如果被伪造人可以追认,其追认效力是属于有溯及力的补充授权,还是不具有溯及力的一种新的票据行为。这些问题均亟待解决。为此,针对表见伪造和被伪造人追认这个核心问题,有必要根据具体情况分别作出不同的责任划分,以求厘清票据伪造中当事人的责任关系。
[Abstract]:In the case of bill forgery, forgers and counterfeiters are generally not liable for bills. In our country academic circles, this has already become the conclusion. However, in case of apparent forgery, the person who has been falsified shall bear the responsibility. However, it is worth studying whether the accountability can be solved by analogy. In addition, when a forged person is willing to ratify, the forged person is not exempt from liability for the bill. The question is: what is the object of bill forgery if the forgery person is willing to ratify it? Furthermore, if the forgery can be ratified, the validity of the ratification is a supplementary authorization with retroactive effect or a new act of bill with no retroactive effect. These problems need to be solved urgently. Therefore, in view of the core problem of apparent forgery and confirmation by forgeries, it is necessary to make different division of responsibilities according to specific circumstances in order to clarify the liability relationship of the parties in the forgery of bills.
【作者单位】：华东政法大学经济法学院;
【基金】：上海市高校一流学科(法学)建设计划(经济法学科)的阶段性研究成果教育部人文社会科学研究规划基金“十二五期间我国商法领域的工作重点——票据法修改”(项目批准号:11YJA820038)的阶段性研究成果
【分类号】：D924.3

【参考文献】