本文選題：航空器租賃 + 融資�。� 參考：《吉林大學(xué)》2012年博士論文

【摘要】：截至2008年底，中國(guó)各航空公司運(yùn)營(yíng)的1200多架民用航空器中，有65%是依靠租賃引進(jìn)的。未來(lái)隨著中國(guó)民航運(yùn)輸總量的進(jìn)一步擴(kuò)張，航空器租賃的比例與總數(shù)還將繼續(xù)攀升。可以毫不夸張地說(shuō)，航空器租賃活動(dòng)支撐了中國(guó)民用航空事業(yè)的過(guò)去、現(xiàn)在以及未來(lái)。因此如何保障民航產(chǎn)業(yè)能夠獲取航空器租賃的機(jī)會(huì)、降低航空器租賃的成本也就成為決定未來(lái)我國(guó)民航產(chǎn)業(yè)發(fā)展的關(guān)鍵因素之一。 航空器租賃是一種以“資產(chǎn)（航空器）”為支持的融資活動(dòng)，出租人對(duì)航空器保有的物權(quán)性權(quán)益是化解交易風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的基本保障。因?yàn)橐坏⿲?duì)方發(fā)生信用風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，出租人可以憑借其權(quán)益而直接取回航空器以彌補(bǔ)租金債權(quán)的損失。然而，租賃交易中出租人對(duì)航空器的取回權(quán)能否獲得承認(rèn)并快速地得到實(shí)現(xiàn)，取決于承租人所在國(guó)法律的實(shí)際狀況。如果當(dāng)?shù)胤刹荒茏鹬爻鲎馊藱?quán)益的優(yōu)先效力、不能保證出租人在資產(chǎn)快速貶值前取回航空器，租賃的擔(dān)保功能將無(wú)從發(fā)揮，航空器租賃也就無(wú)法開展或者只能以較高的成本來(lái)開展。經(jīng)過(guò)十幾年的摸索和努力建立起來(lái)的中國(guó)航空器租賃相關(guān)法律制度是否足以支撐本國(guó)航空公司獲取航空器租賃的活動(dòng)？未來(lái)進(jìn)一步完善與改革的方向在哪里？為解答這些問(wèn)題，本文采用歷史分析、比較分析和利益分析的研究方法對(duì)航空器租賃法律保護(hù)機(jī)制的基本理論和具體制度展開研究和探索。 本文共分5章，第1章為導(dǎo)論部分。 第2章首先從租賃的發(fā)展歷程和社會(huì)功能開始，分析得出航空器租賃本質(zhì)上乃是一種蘊(yùn)含擔(dān)保功能的融資活動(dòng)。租賃自身蘊(yùn)含的擔(dān)保功能是通過(guò)出租人對(duì)于租賃物的取回權(quán)來(lái)實(shí)現(xiàn)的，取回權(quán)的權(quán)原是出租人對(duì)于租賃物所持有的物權(quán)性權(quán)益。航空器租賃法律保護(hù)機(jī)制的核心作用正是確保租賃所具有的擔(dān)保功能，即確保出租人得以在租賃合同履行受阻時(shí)快速地取回航空器。因此從吸引租賃融資的角度上來(lái)看，航空公司所在國(guó)應(yīng)該建立能夠涵蓋以下三個(gè)方面的法律保護(hù)機(jī)制：據(jù)以確認(rèn)出租人持有的航空器權(quán)益的物權(quán)或擔(dān)保法律制度；尊重出租人權(quán)益的破產(chǎn)制度；確保出租人能夠快速實(shí)現(xiàn)取回權(quán)的司法程序制度。 第3章運(yùn)用比較分析的方法對(duì)幾個(gè)主要國(guó)家國(guó)內(nèi)航空器租賃法律保護(hù)機(jī)制進(jìn)行介紹、分析和評(píng)論。美國(guó)是航空器租賃活動(dòng)的發(fā)源地，也是迄今為止航空器租賃活動(dòng)發(fā)展最為繁盛、最為成熟的地方，這種狀況與其國(guó)內(nèi)法律保護(hù)機(jī)制的完善有著密不可分的關(guān)系。美國(guó)國(guó)內(nèi)充分體現(xiàn)現(xiàn)代融資活動(dòng)的商事法律規(guī)則，，以及專門為航空器租賃活動(dòng)構(gòu)建起的法律體制，都保證了本國(guó)航空產(chǎn)業(yè)吸引租賃融資的能力。加拿大既沒(méi)有全國(guó)性的統(tǒng)一航空器權(quán)益登記系統(tǒng)，也沒(méi)有為航空器租賃活動(dòng)進(jìn)行專門立法，但是其內(nèi)部各省發(fā)達(dá)的財(cái)產(chǎn)法律同樣為租賃活動(dòng)出租人權(quán)益的確認(rèn)和保護(hù)提供了基本的支撐。作為大陸法系典型代表的法國(guó)在物權(quán)和合同基本法律制度上都頗為保守，對(duì)航空器出租人取回權(quán)的保護(hù)主要是通過(guò)專門立法的形式來(lái)實(shí)現(xiàn)。對(duì)比三個(gè)國(guó)家的國(guó)內(nèi)機(jī)制，雖然構(gòu)建于不同的法律傳統(tǒng)和法律理念之上，但都在一定程度上實(shí)現(xiàn)了對(duì)航空器租賃活動(dòng)的有效支撐，其中的方式、方法值得我國(guó)借鑒。 第4章是對(duì)航空器租賃國(guó)際法律保護(hù)機(jī)制的研究與分析。航空器的移動(dòng)性和物權(quán)適用“物之所在地法”的普遍法律適用原則，使得對(duì)出租人航空器權(quán)益的確認(rèn)和保護(hù)都需要國(guó)際合作。1948年《日內(nèi)瓦公約》以統(tǒng)一各國(guó)沖突法規(guī)則為己任，為航空器租賃活動(dòng)的開展建立起最初的國(guó)際法律機(jī)制。2001年通過(guò)的《開普敦公約》及其《航空器議定書》則是一個(gè)更具革命性的統(tǒng)一實(shí)體法規(guī)則體系，根據(jù)該體系建立起來(lái)的國(guó)際登記制度、違約救濟(jì)制度和破產(chǎn)救濟(jì)制度，使航空器租賃的國(guó)際保護(hù)機(jī)制遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)先進(jìn)于多數(shù)國(guó)家的國(guó)內(nèi)法律機(jī)制。 第5章是對(duì)中國(guó)航空器租賃法律保護(hù)機(jī)制的現(xiàn)狀、不足以及未來(lái)發(fā)展建議的研究與探討。第一節(jié)首先對(duì)中國(guó)航空器租賃法律制度的歷史發(fā)展和現(xiàn)實(shí)情況展開介紹和分析。第二節(jié)分析了開普敦公約體系在中國(guó)適用的依據(jù)、范圍和問(wèn)題，并在此基礎(chǔ)上對(duì)開普敦公約體系的內(nèi)容與中國(guó)國(guó)內(nèi)對(duì)應(yīng)的法律制度展開對(duì)比與評(píng)價(jià)。第三節(jié)提出了完善中國(guó)航空器租賃法律保護(hù)機(jī)制的路徑和方法建議。指出我國(guó)應(yīng)考慮改革現(xiàn)有的航空器權(quán)利登記系統(tǒng)以應(yīng)對(duì)不斷發(fā)展的融資實(shí)踐；應(yīng)該放開開普敦公約體系對(duì)于“國(guó)內(nèi)交易”在適用上的限制，以使向我國(guó)航空公司提供租賃服務(wù)的出租人都能享受到平等的、高標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的法律保障。
[Abstract]:By the end of 2008, 65% of the more than 1200 civil aircraft operated by Chinese airlines were introduced by lease. With the further expansion of the total volume of China's civil aviation, the proportion and total of the aircraft leasing will continue to rise. It is no exaggeration to say that the aviation leasing activities have supported China's civil aviation industry. It is one of the key factors to determine the future development of China's civil aviation industry by ensuring that the civil aviation industry can obtain the opportunity to lease the aircraft and reduce the cost of the aircraft leasing.
The leasehold is a financing activity supported by "assets (aircraft)". The property rights and interests of the lessor are the basic guarantee to resolve the transaction risk. As once the other party has a credit risk, the lessor can take back the airline directly to make up for the loss of the rent. If the lessor's right to retrieve the aircraft is recognized and realized quickly, it depends on the actual situation of the law in the country where the lessee is located. If the local law does not respect the priority effect of the lessor's rights and interests, it can not guarantee the lessor's return to the aircraft before the rapid devaluation of the assets, and the Charter function of the lease will not be exerted and the aircraft rents will be rented. It is impossible to carry out or can only be carried out at a higher cost. Is the legal system of China aircraft leasing established after more than ten years of exploration and efforts to support the activities of national airlines to obtain aircraft leasing? Where is the future of further improvement and reform? To answer these questions, this article adopts Historical analysis, comparative analysis and research methods of interest analysis have carried out research and Exploration on the basic theory and specific system of the legal protection mechanism of aircraft leasing.
This article is divided into 5 chapters, and the first chapter is the introduction.
The second chapter begins with the development process and social function of the lease. It is concluded that the aircraft leasing is essentially a financing activity containing the guarantee function. The guarantee function contained in the lease is realized by the lessor's right to retrieve the leasehold. The right to take back the right is the property property of the leasor for the lease. The core role of the legal protection mechanism of aircraft leasing is to ensure that the lease has the guarantee function, that is to ensure that the lessor is able to quickly retrieve the aircraft when the lease contract is impeded. Therefore, from the perspective of attracting leasing financing, the country where the airline is located should establish a legal guarantee that covers the following three aspects. Protection mechanism: the legal system for identifying the rights and interests of the aircrafts held by the lessor; the bankruptcy system that respects the rights of the lessor; and the judicial procedure system to ensure the lessor's quick realization of the rights of the lessor.
The third chapter introduces the legal protection mechanism of the domestic aircraft leasing in several major countries by comparative analysis. The United States is the birthplace of the aircraft leasing activities, and is also the most prosperous and mature place of the aircraft leasing activities so far. This situation and its domestic legal protection mechanism are perfect. There is an inextricable relationship. The United States fully embodies the commercial legal rules of modern financing activities, as well as the legal system specially built for aircraft leasing activities, which have guaranteed the ability of the domestic aviation industry to attract leasing financing. Canada has neither the national unified airspace registration system nor the rent for the aircraft. The renting activities carry out special legislation, but the developed property laws in each province also provide basic support for the confirmation and protection of the leasehold's rights and interests. As a typical representative of the continental law system, France is rather conservative in the basic legal system of property and contract, and the protection of the reclaim right of the aeronautical lessor is mainly through the protection of the rights of the aeronautics and crafts. The internal mechanism of the three countries, which is built on different legal traditions and legal ideas, has realized the effective support to the leasehold of aircraft to some extent, and the method is worthy of reference in our country.
The fourth chapter is the study and analysis of the international legal protection mechanism of aircraft leasing. The universal legal application principle of the mobility of aircraft and the application of real right to the law of "the location of things" makes it necessary to confirm and protect the rights and interests of the lessor's aircraft, which will take the "Geneva public agreement" as its own responsibility for the United States conflict of law rules for.1948 years. The launch of aircraft leasing activities established the original international legal mechanism, the Cape Town Convention and the aircraft protocol, adopted in.2001, is a more revolutionary unified entity law system, the international registration system established according to the system, the remedy system of breach of contract and the system of bankruptcy relief, and the state of the aircraft leasing. The inter protection mechanism is far superior to the domestic legal mechanisms of most countries.
The fifth chapter is the present situation of the legal protection mechanism of the leasehold of China aircraft, and the research and discussion of the future development proposals. First section first introduces and analyzes the historical development and reality of the legal system of China's aircraft leasing. The second section analyses the basis, scope and problems of the application of the Cape Town convention system in China. On this basis, the contents of the Cape Town convention system and the corresponding legal system in China are compared and evaluated. The third section puts forward the ways and methods to improve the legal protection mechanism of China aircraft leasing, and points out that China should consider reforming the existing registration system of aircraft rights to cope with the continuous development of financing practice; The restrictions on the applicability of the Cape Town convention system to "domestic transactions" should be liberalized so that lessors who provide rental services to our airlines can enjoy equal and high standard legal safeguards.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉林大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：D997

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 孟繁超;朱彤彤;;民用航空器物權(quán)體系建構(gòu)若干問(wèn)題研究[J];安徽大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2008年01期

2 郝秀輝;;從統(tǒng)計(jì)看中國(guó)航空法學(xué)的崛起——中國(guó)航空法學(xué)30年發(fā)展研究綜述(三)[J];北京航空航天大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2010年04期

3 徐潔;;簡(jiǎn)評(píng)美國(guó)《統(tǒng)一商法典》第九篇擔(dān)保制度[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2007年04期

4 田宇生;張亞瓊;;破產(chǎn)案件法律適用中的利益衡量 基于“東星航空”破產(chǎn)案的探索[J];法律適用;2011年12期

5 韓長(zhǎng)印;破產(chǎn)宣告對(duì)未履行合同的效力初探[J];法商研究(中南政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));1997年03期

6 車丕照;論條約在我國(guó)的適用[J];法學(xué)雜志;2005年03期

7 郝秀輝;王大海;;航運(yùn)融資中的航空器抵押權(quán)研究[J];法學(xué)雜志;2010年01期

8 許德風(fēng);;論破產(chǎn)中尚未履行完畢的合同[J];法學(xué)家;2009年06期

9 熊丙萬(wàn);;論商事留置權(quán)[J];法學(xué)家;2011年04期

10 郭玉軍;陸寰;;美國(guó)民用航空器留置權(quán)問(wèn)題研究[J];華東政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2010年06期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前4條

1 吳一鳴;英美物權(quán)法之大陸法解讀[D];華東政法大學(xué);2010年

2 劉敬東;國(guó)際融資租賃法律問(wèn)題研究[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2001年

3 郝秀輝;航空器致第三人損害的侵權(quán)責(zé)任研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2009年

4 齊明;美國(guó)破產(chǎn)重整制度研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2009年

本文編號(hào)：1856421