票据抗辩制度之比较研究

发布时间：2018-01-03 18:28

本文关键词：票据抗辩制度之比较研究　出处：《吉林财经大学》2017年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：票据是最早产生、最典型的有价证券,被誉为“有价证券之父”,更是商业运作中不可缺少的工具。自从有了票据以来,人们之间的商业活动空前加快,交易也更加趋向于规模化。票据作为一种重要的金融与商业的工具,其最大的优势是使得票据摆脱基础交易并具有独立的“流通性”,这也是票据法设计之初衷和核心。但是在票据法的诸多规则中,大量的规定都是为了保护票据权利人的权益,例如,票据债权人不仅享有两次请求权——付款请求权和追索权。并且还拥有在自己的票据权利得不到实现或因故丧失的情况下,享有的票据法上规定的特殊救济权利,如利益偿还请求权等。任何一部法律的初衷都是寻求一种适当的平衡关系,只有平衡的法律才有可能实现良好的实际效果,基于此,为了达到票据法律关系的双方当事人之间的一种和谐的平衡关系,票据法赋予票据债务人以票据抗辩权。票据抗辩是票据法为票据义务人规定的一种自我保护方式,票据抗辩权则是票据义务人所用的与票据权利人的请求权相对立的一项权利。1995年《中华人民共和国票据法》的颁布、实施,是我国票据活动的起步,我们的票据活动从此有了专门的法律依据,其作为我国社会主义法律体系的重要组成部分,对于我国的法制国家的建设和发展起着不可磨灭的重要作用。2004年对《票据法》的进一步修改是我国加入WTO之后对票据制度进行的又一次完善。然后与世界上其他各国的票据立法相比,我们还是刚刚处于雏形期。囿于各方面条件的限制与中国市场经济的发育不足,我国的《票据法》的存在的缺陷仍然比较明显。为此,笔者认为,我们需要借鉴西方发达国家的先进经验,尤其是作为票据法律制度的一项重要内容的票据抗辩制度。因而比较法研究也就突显其重要性。本文试图透过我国与国外在票据抗辩的比较研究,结合具体的案例,来具体分析中外票据抗辩的差异化,并对我国的票据抗辩制度的完善提出一些宝贵可行的建议。笔者认为,案例研究作为一项重要的研究方法,对票据抗辩的比较研究起着重要作用,它能与单纯地理论的比较研究相辅相成,优势互补。
[Abstract]:The bill is the earliest and most typical securities, known as the "father of securities", is an indispensable tool in business operation. Since the bill since people the business activities between the unprecedented speed, transactions also tend to be more scale. As a kind of financial and commercial bills to the tool, its biggest advantage is to get rid of the transaction and makes the bill based independent "liquidity", this is the original intention of the negotiable instruments law design and core. But in many rules of the negotiable instrument law, a large number of provisions is to protect the obligee's rights, for example, the bill creditor enjoys not only the two request right: the right of claim for payment and the right of recourse. And also have in their own rights to the instrument can not be realized or been lost under the condition of special relief rights of negotiable instruments law enjoys the right of claim for reinstating interest as any. The law of the original intention is to seek a proper balance, only the balance of the law is likely to achieve good practical effect, based on this, to a harmonious balance between both parties to the legal relationship of bill, bill law gives the debtor to defense right. Defense is a kind of self protection the way for the obligor of negotiable instruments law provisions of the defense right is a right.1995 by the obligor and obligee's claim that opposition to the annual People's Republic of China commercial paper law promulgated < >, implementation, is China's bill activities started, we note henceforth have a special legal basis and as an important part of China's socialist legal system, for the construction and development of legal system of our country plays an important role in the.2004 years of indelible law "into the bill" A step change is after China's accession to the WTO of the bill system is a perfect. Then with the rest of the world on the negotiable instrument legislation compared, we still just in the embryonic period. Due to various constraints and Chinese market economy development deficiencies and defects of the negotiable instrument law of our country < > is still obviously. Therefore, the author believes that we need to learn from the advanced experience of western developed countries, especially the defense system as an important content of legal system of negotiable instruments. The comparison study also highlights the importance of this paper. Through the comparative study of China and foreign countries in defense, combined with the specific case, the difference the analysis of Chinese and foreign negotiable instruments, and put forward some feasible suggestions and valuable to our defense system. The author believes that the case study as an important research method, The comparative study of bill defense plays an important role. It can complement each other and complement each other with the comparative study of the simple theory.

【学位授予单位】：吉林财经大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D922.287

【相似文献】