本文選題：跨境破產(chǎn)　切入點(diǎn)：法律沖突　出處：《西南政法大學(xué)》2011年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：隨著經(jīng)濟(jì)全球化的深入和跨國(guó)企業(yè)的不斷發(fā)展,世界經(jīng)濟(jì)一體化進(jìn)程使得世界各國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)之間的相互影響和依存更加廣泛和深入,不可避免地導(dǎo)致破產(chǎn)問題不再局限于一國(guó)之內(nèi)�？缇称飘a(chǎn)案件因其數(shù)量眾多、所涉利益巨大而得到學(xué)界及實(shí)務(wù)界的廣泛關(guān)注。然而,由于各國(guó)在政治目標(biāo)、經(jīng)濟(jì)利益、法律價(jià)值取向、法律傳統(tǒng)等方面存在分歧,不同國(guó)家法律在跨境破產(chǎn)這一問題上的規(guī)定也就千差萬(wàn)別,導(dǎo)致對(duì)跨境破產(chǎn)案件進(jìn)行國(guó)際協(xié)調(diào)存在著諸多困難。國(guó)際立法上曾試圖通過(guò)統(tǒng)一立法實(shí)現(xiàn)破產(chǎn)普遍主義的理想,但破產(chǎn)問題往往涉及一國(guó)重大經(jīng)濟(jì)利益、公共利益,各國(guó)難以達(dá)成完全的共識(shí),進(jìn)而在立法上取得突破性進(jìn)展。 鑒于完善跨境破產(chǎn)相關(guān)法律制度的重要性和緊迫性,本文擬就跨境破產(chǎn)中主要的國(guó)際私法問題進(jìn)行概述和研究,包括跨境破產(chǎn)的概念、歷史沿革、法律沖突、域外效力、法律適用及承認(rèn)與協(xié)助等,并重點(diǎn)就我國(guó)跨境破產(chǎn)領(lǐng)域的法律規(guī)定和司法實(shí)踐進(jìn)行總結(jié)和分析,以期找到立法的困境、對(duì)相關(guān)法律實(shí)務(wù)進(jìn)行前瞻性研究。 筆者認(rèn)為,在立法層面,我國(guó)歷史上在域外破產(chǎn)宣告的效力問題上一直堅(jiān)持嚴(yán)格的屬地主義,但部分地區(qū)也隨著經(jīng)濟(jì)的發(fā)展對(duì)屬地主義做出過(guò)變通。在《企業(yè)破產(chǎn)法》頒布實(shí)施后,我國(guó)法律對(duì)破產(chǎn)宣告的域外效力的規(guī)定才予以明確,其在理論上較為接近普遍主義,但又對(duì)普遍主義進(jìn)行了限制。在司法實(shí)踐層面,從《企業(yè)破產(chǎn)法》實(shí)施前后的相關(guān)案例來(lái)看,我國(guó)法院認(rèn)為我國(guó)破產(chǎn)的宣告具有域外效力。另一方面,我國(guó)法院在對(duì)待外國(guó)法院宣告的破產(chǎn)時(shí)仍堅(jiān)持嚴(yán)格的屬地主義,不承認(rèn)外國(guó)法院宣告的破產(chǎn)效力及于債務(wù)人位于中國(guó)的財(cái)產(chǎn)。這種做法難逃雙重標(biāo)準(zhǔn)之嫌疑,也與跨境破產(chǎn)中國(guó)際合作之趨勢(shì)不符。筆者認(rèn)為,造成上述問題的主要原因有是立法本身給境外破產(chǎn)宣告在中國(guó)的承認(rèn)與執(zhí)行帶來(lái)了極大的不確定因素。因此筆者進(jìn)一步認(rèn)為,在法律框架的層面上,我國(guó)需要進(jìn)一步完善、統(tǒng)一與跨境破產(chǎn)相關(guān)的法律制度,包括在《企業(yè)破產(chǎn)法》中對(duì)跨境破產(chǎn)做更為詳盡的專章規(guī)定或出臺(tái)相應(yīng)的司法解釋等。
[Abstract]:With the deepening of economic globalization and the continuous development of transnational enterprises, the process of world economic integration has made the interaction and interdependence among the economies of the world more extensive and profound. Inevitably, bankruptcy is no longer confined to one country. Because of its large number and enormous interests, cross-border bankruptcy cases have attracted wide attention in academic and practical circles. However, because of the political objectives, economic interests of countries, There are differences in legal value orientation, legal tradition, and so on. The provisions of the laws of different countries on the issue of cross-border bankruptcy are also very different. There are many difficulties in international coordination of cross-border bankruptcy cases. International legislation has tried to realize the ideal of bankruptcy universalism through unified legislation, but bankruptcy issues often involve a country's major economic interests and public interests. Countries are difficult to reach a complete consensus, and then make a breakthrough in legislation. In view of the importance and urgency of perfecting the legal system related to cross-border bankruptcy, this paper intends to outline and study the main private international law issues in cross-border bankruptcy, including the concept, historical evolution, conflict of laws, extraterritorial effects of cross-border bankruptcy, In order to find out the dilemma of legislation and to carry out a prospective study on relevant legal practice, the author summarizes and analyzes the legal provisions and judicial practice in the field of cross-border bankruptcy in China. In my opinion, in the legislative level, China has always adhered to strict territorialism on the issue of the effect of the extraterritorial bankruptcy declaration in the history of our country. However, with the development of economy, some regions have also made modifications to territorialism. After the promulgation and implementation of Enterprise bankruptcy Law, the provisions of the extraterritorial effect of bankruptcy declaration in our country were clearly defined, and in theory it was closer to universalism. At the judicial practice level, from the relevant cases before and after the implementation of Enterprise bankruptcy Law, the court of our country considers that the declaration of bankruptcy has extraterritorial effect. Our courts still adhere to strict territorialism when dealing with bankruptcy declared by foreign courts, and do not recognize that the bankruptcy effect declared by foreign courts extends to the property of the debtor located in China. This practice cannot escape the suspicion of double standards. It is also inconsistent with the trend of international cooperation in cross-border bankruptcy. The author believes that the main reason for the above problems is that the legislation itself brings a great deal of uncertainty to the recognition and enforcement of the declaration of overseas bankruptcy in China. At the level of legal framework, our country needs to further improve and unify the legal system related to cross-border bankruptcy, including making more detailed regulations on cross-border bankruptcy in Enterprise bankruptcy Law or issuing corresponding judicial explanations, etc.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號(hào)】：D997

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 張玲;;破產(chǎn)法律適用立法的新突破——?dú)W盟破產(chǎn)法律適用規(guī)范的注釋與評(píng)析[J];比較法研究;2006年02期

2 殷慧芬;;美國(guó)破產(chǎn)法2005年修正案述評(píng)[J];比較法研究;2007年02期

3 宋錫祥;;論歐盟跨國(guó)破產(chǎn)法[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2007年04期

4 徐文超;國(guó)際破產(chǎn)的法律適用[J];江淮論壇;2004年04期

5 石靜遐;破產(chǎn)域外效力的比較分析[J];法學(xué)研究;1995年03期

6 何其生;;新實(shí)用主義與晚近破產(chǎn)沖突法的發(fā)展[J];法學(xué)研究;2007年06期

7 郭樹理;歐盟統(tǒng)一國(guó)際破產(chǎn)法運(yùn)動(dòng)的最新進(jìn)展[J];歐洲;2001年04期

8 海棠;簡(jiǎn)論破產(chǎn)宣告的域外效力[J];前沿;1999年04期

9 宋錫祥;日本涉外破產(chǎn)法律制度的最新修正及其借鑒[J];外國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)與管理;2002年04期

10 石靜遐;我國(guó)破產(chǎn)程序域外效力的實(shí)例分析——評(píng)香港高等法院對(duì)“廣信”破產(chǎn)程序的承認(rèn)[J];政法論壇;2002年03期

，

本文編號(hào)：1560321