發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-06-17 05:48

  本文選題：無單放貨 + 鹿特丹規(guī)則�。� 參考：《內(nèi)蒙古大學(xué)》2011年碩士論文

【摘要】：提單是海上貨物運(yùn)輸中非常重要的單證,它是承運(yùn)人簽發(fā)給托運(yùn)人的表明其已經(jīng)收取貨物的憑證,它是承運(yùn)人與托運(yùn)人之間運(yùn)輸合同的證明,也是證明承托雙方權(quán)利和義務(wù)的主要依據(jù)同時(shí)它還是貨物所有權(quán)的憑證。按照國(guó)際航運(yùn)慣例,承運(yùn)人一般有義務(wù)在約定的卸貨港憑正本提單交付貨物。憑正本提單提貨是國(guó)際海運(yùn)的基本原則。承運(yùn)人無單放貨需要承擔(dān)法律責(zé)任這是毋庸置疑的,但對(duì)于承運(yùn)人到底應(yīng)承擔(dān)什么樣的法律責(zé)任,又應(yīng)當(dāng)如何承擔(dān),在什么情況下承運(yùn)人無單放貨可以免責(zé)等問題,有關(guān)公約尚未統(tǒng)一,各國(guó)實(shí)踐也不盡相同。承運(yùn)人的責(zé)任牽涉到對(duì)無單放貨行為的法律定性問題。而對(duì)無單放貨行為法律性質(zhì)的不同定性往往會(huì)導(dǎo)致法律適用、審判程序和判決結(jié)果的差異。這就使其成為提單糾紛中最為突出的問題。 本文通過對(duì)無單放貨概念,產(chǎn)生原因、現(xiàn)狀及法律后果等歷史性歸納總結(jié)性分析闡述分析無單放貨中承運(yùn)人責(zé)任問題的法律屬性及免責(zé)事由和救濟(jì)途徑,最后結(jié)合《鹿特丹規(guī)則》和《無單放貨規(guī)則》等最新法律規(guī)定,通過對(duì)比給出我國(guó)對(duì)于無單放貨承運(yùn)人法律責(zé)任國(guó)內(nèi)外沖突制度如何協(xié)調(diào)選擇的點(diǎn)點(diǎn)建議。 本文除引言和結(jié)語外正文共由三部分構(gòu)成。第一部分概述無單放貨的概念,產(chǎn)生原因、現(xiàn)狀及法律后果、承運(yùn)人責(zé)任問題的法律屬性、免責(zé)事由和救濟(jì)途徑。第二部分介紹國(guó)內(nèi)外主要是《鹿特丹規(guī)則》和《無單放貨規(guī)則》關(guān)于無單放貨責(zé)任承運(yùn)人責(zé)任的最新發(fā)展。第三部分對(duì)比國(guó)內(nèi)外主要是《鹿特丹規(guī)則》和《無單放貨規(guī)則》關(guān)于無單放貨規(guī)定承運(yùn)人責(zé)任的不同點(diǎn)并就這些不同點(diǎn)加以比較分析,最后就《鹿特丹規(guī)則》與我國(guó)法律強(qiáng)制性規(guī)定相沖突的部分我國(guó)應(yīng)如何協(xié)調(diào)選擇做出簡(jiǎn)單闡述。
[Abstract]:Bill of lading is a very important document in the carriage of goods by sea. It is a document issued by the carrier to the shipper indicating that it has received the goods. It is a proof of the contract of carriage between the carrier and the shipper. It is also the main basis for certifying the rights and obligations of both parties and it is also the evidence of ownership of the goods. Under international shipping practice, the carrier is generally obliged to deliver the goods at the agreed port of discharge with the original bill of lading. It is the basic principle of international shipping to pick up goods by original bill of lading. There is no doubt that the carrier should bear legal liability for the delivery of goods without a bill of lading. However, there are questions such as what kind of legal liability should be borne by the carrier, and how, and under what circumstances, the carrier can be exempted from liability for the delivery of goods without a bill of lading. Relevant conventions have not yet been unified, and practice varies from country to country. The carrier's responsibility involves the legal characterization of undocumented delivery. However, the difference of legal nature of undocumented delivery will lead to the difference of law application, trial procedure and judgment result. This makes it the most prominent issue in the bill of lading dispute. Through the historical summation analysis of the concept, causes, present situation and legal consequences of the delivery of goods without bill of lading, this paper expounds and analyzes the legal attributes, the reasons of exemption and the ways of relief of the carrier's liability in the delivery of goods without bill of lading. Finally, combined with the latest laws and regulations, such as Rotterdam rule and undocumented delivery rule, this paper gives some suggestions on how to coordinate the selection of domestic and foreign conflict systems for the legal liability of non-bill delivery carriers in our country through comparison. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, the text consists of three parts. The first part summarizes the concept, causes, current situation and legal consequences, legal attributes of the carrier's liability, the reasons of exemption and the way of relief. The second part introduces the latest development of carrier's liability for delivery of goods without bill of lading, mainly in the Rotterdam Rule and the Rule of delivery without Bill of lading. The third part compares the differences between the Rotterdam rules and the undocumented delivery rules about the carrier's liability, and makes a comparative analysis of these differences. In the end, the author gives a brief explanation on how to coordinate the choice between Rotterdam rules and the compulsory provisions of Chinese law.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：內(nèi)蒙古大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號(hào)】：D996.19;D922.294

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 祁歡;;《鹿特丹規(guī)則》對(duì)無單放貨承運(yùn)人責(zé)任制度的影響[J];北京工商大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2010年06期

2 胡正良;海運(yùn)提單項(xiàng)下的提貨權(quán)與承運(yùn)人無單放貨責(zé)任的認(rèn)定[J];大連海事大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2003年02期

3 劉剛仿;;國(guó)際貨物買賣中無單放貨問題的解決路徑探析[J];國(guó)際貿(mào)易問題;2010年06期

4 盧小青;;《鹿特丹規(guī)則》規(guī)制無單放貨之新動(dòng)向[J];世界海運(yùn);2010年10期

5 盧兆豐;高雪峰;;從一則典型案例看無單放貨[J];中國(guó)水運(yùn)(學(xué)術(shù)版);2007年08期

6 陳琦恒;從提單性質(zhì)看無單放貨行為的法律責(zé)任[J];武漢理工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2005年02期

7 紀(jì)榮泰;王楠;;無單放貨法律性質(zhì)之法理分析與救濟(jì)途徑選擇[J];現(xiàn)代財(cái)經(jīng)(天津財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào));2008年05期

8 代杰;;評(píng)析最高人民法院關(guān)于無單放貨司法解釋中承運(yùn)人責(zé)任競(jìng)合的問題[J];現(xiàn)代經(jīng)濟(jì)信息;2009年18期

9 汪一超;;解決國(guó)內(nèi)無正本提單提貨的途徑[J];中國(guó)海商法年刊;1992年00期

10 楊良宜,田正大;無提單交貨[J];中國(guó)海商法年刊;1994年00期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前5條

1 蔡海英;無單放貨下各方的責(zé)任承擔(dān)與防范無單放貨的應(yīng)對(duì)措施研究[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2007年

2 李麗;無單放貨有關(guān)法律問題探討[D];四川大學(xué);2007年

3 孔鶴;試論鹿特丹規(guī)則中承運(yùn)人責(zé)任制度變革對(duì)無單放貨問題的影響[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2009年

4 代丹丹;《鹿特丹規(guī)則》中港口當(dāng)局及其他第三方法律地位和作用研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2009年

5 賀曉丹;無單放貨法律的新發(fā)展[D];復(fù)旦大學(xué);2010年

，

本文編號(hào)：2029957