本文關(guān)鍵詞： 無單放貨 提單 請(qǐng)求權(quán)基礎(chǔ) 違約 侵權(quán)　出處：《華東政法大學(xué)》2015年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：提單雖是在運(yùn)輸過程中由承運(yùn)人簽發(fā)而成,但其在經(jīng)濟(jì)活動(dòng)中的作用并不僅僅體現(xiàn)在運(yùn)輸階段,其多棲活動(dòng)狀態(tài)決定了國(guó)際貨物買賣、海上貨物運(yùn)輸及信用證結(jié)算等經(jīng)濟(jì)活動(dòng)均以之為連接因素,形成錯(cuò)綜復(fù)雜的法律關(guān)系。其項(xiàng)下?lián)p害賠償成為海運(yùn)貨物索賠領(lǐng)域的一大難題。偏偏無單放貨是海上貨物運(yùn)輸中常見的糾紛,據(jù)國(guó)際海事委員會(huì)(CMI)的2000年統(tǒng)計(jì),班輪運(yùn)輸存在15%的無單放貨現(xiàn)象,租船運(yùn)輸達(dá)到50%,而某些重要的商品如油、礦物的交易甚至高達(dá)100%。而隨著航海技術(shù)的迅猛發(fā)展,大大加快了國(guó)際貨物運(yùn)輸?shù)乃俣?提單的流轉(zhuǎn)速度很多情況下已經(jīng)跟不上貨物運(yùn)輸?shù)乃俣?為減少倉(cāng)儲(chǔ)成本,港口疏散貨物避免積壓壓力,解決收貨人提貨之急迫,時(shí)至今日,無正本提單放貨的現(xiàn)象層出不窮,無單交付貨物糾紛案件呈逐年上升趨勢(shì),對(duì)提單持有人的權(quán)利救濟(jì)非常必要。但是,關(guān)于無單放貨損害賠償問題,我國(guó)《海商法》沒有作出明確的規(guī)定,理論上雖然也多有探討,但觀點(diǎn)也并不統(tǒng)一,且多集中在對(duì)提單物權(quán)效力抑或債權(quán)效力等性質(zhì)、功能方面進(jìn)行研究,學(xué)術(shù)性比較強(qiáng),很有參考價(jià)值,但由于現(xiàn)有研究多是對(duì)提單某一法律點(diǎn)的研究,在解決實(shí)際問題中難以直接加以適用。雖然為了解決無單放貨損害賠償定性問題,最高人民法院出臺(tái)了《最高人民法院關(guān)于審理無正本提單交付貨物案件適用法律若干問題的規(guī)定》,賦予了提單持有人違約或侵權(quán)損害賠償請(qǐng)求權(quán)。但是《規(guī)定》并未進(jìn)一步規(guī)定或解釋違反的是何約定,侵犯的是何權(quán)利,以至于在實(shí)踐中適用混亂。本文擬運(yùn)用請(qǐng)求權(quán)基礎(chǔ)的方法,探尋提單項(xiàng)下提單持有人對(duì)承運(yùn)人有何請(qǐng)求權(quán),進(jìn)一步再探討違反原給付請(qǐng)求權(quán)所生之次給付請(qǐng)求權(quán),以期解說過程能夠做到有理有據(jù),降低結(jié)論的隨意性。文章分為三部分,第一部分主要介紹無單放貨的由來,并且梳理提單所涉及的商事交易,并在此基礎(chǔ)上對(duì)提單相關(guān)的主要的法律關(guān)系進(jìn)行分析,進(jìn)一步提出糾紛解決過程中可能會(huì)遇到的難題。如同庖丁解牛,只有對(duì)牛之結(jié)構(gòu)紋理了若指掌,方能游刃有余,法律之運(yùn)用也是如此,尤其對(duì)于涉及多重交易關(guān)系的提單法律問題的法律適用更需如此,僅僅勤于修磨法律之刀劍是不夠的,還必須掌握了商事交易的規(guī)律,找準(zhǔn)交易法律癥結(jié)之所在,才可能更有效的解決問題。落到實(shí)處,涉及到提單的法律關(guān)系主要有以下幾種。第一,提單法律關(guān)系本身。即提單簽發(fā)之承運(yùn)人與提單合法持有之收貨人之間的法律關(guān)系,該二當(dāng)事人為提單法律關(guān)系的基本當(dāng)事人。依據(jù)該法律關(guān)系,提單合法持有人得憑提單向承運(yùn)人主張貨物交付請(qǐng)求權(quán)及其次給付請(qǐng)求權(quán),并且承擔(dān)提單上記載的義務(wù);承運(yùn)人應(yīng)履行提單記載的見單向提單持有人交付貨物的義務(wù),并且享有提單所記載的權(quán)利。第二,提單簽發(fā)的原因關(guān)系,即海上貨物運(yùn)輸合同。以CIF為例,海上貨物運(yùn)輸合同即為托運(yùn)人(貨方)與承運(yùn)人簽訂的合同關(guān)系。根據(jù)該合同,貨方得請(qǐng)求承運(yùn)人簽發(fā)提單并按照提單記載將貨物交付給提單合法持有人,并且承擔(dān)合同義務(wù);承運(yùn)人負(fù)有履行合同義務(wù)將貨物運(yùn)輸至目的港交付給提單持有人的義務(wù),并且享有合同上權(quán)利。提單的介入,使得海上貨物運(yùn)輸合同上承運(yùn)人與托運(yùn)人之間權(quán)利義務(wù)及責(zé)任的承擔(dān)似乎發(fā)生了一些變化,具體會(huì)有怎樣的影響?而海上貨物運(yùn)輸合同作為原因關(guān)系,對(duì)提單法律關(guān)系有何影響,也對(duì)提單法律關(guān)系中權(quán)利義務(wù)的準(zhǔn)確履行及對(duì)提單持有人權(quán)利是否被保障以及如何被保障,至關(guān)重要,也是本文研究之目的,分析之重心。第三,提單背書轉(zhuǎn)讓或者交付的基礎(chǔ)關(guān)系,包括原始的國(guó)際貨物買賣合同、海上運(yùn)輸在途貨物的買賣、信用證結(jié)算等等。以CIF買賣為例,買賣雙方當(dāng)事人接受以提單的交付視為貨物的交付,根據(jù)買賣合同,提單持有之前手有義務(wù)將提單背書轉(zhuǎn)讓或者交付給后手,并且享有向后手主張支付價(jià)金的權(quán)利;提單受讓人享有向前手主張交付提單的請(qǐng)求權(quán)(后手接受提單如同接受貨物一樣),同時(shí)負(fù)有支付價(jià)金的義務(wù)。應(yīng)探討的是,依提單之交付,除了取得提單上的權(quán)利,是否對(duì)提單項(xiàng)下貨物取得權(quán)利,取得何種權(quán)利?另外,還應(yīng)注意的是,提單項(xiàng)下的基礎(chǔ)法律關(guān)系,除了單證買賣之法律關(guān)系外,尚存在其它涉及單證移轉(zhuǎn)的情形,在他種情形下,提單權(quán)利人對(duì)提單項(xiàng)下貨物又取得怎樣的權(quán)利呢?例如,在使用信用證結(jié)算的方式場(chǎng)合下,提單先轉(zhuǎn)讓給銀行來議付信用證下的款項(xiàng)時(shí),銀行也會(huì)成為受讓提單之提單合法持有人。如果不賦予作為提單合法持有人的銀行對(duì)承運(yùn)人的獨(dú)立請(qǐng)求權(quán),銀行的合法利益就會(huì)難以得到保證,被喻為“國(guó)際貿(mào)易活動(dòng)生命線”的信用證制度也將受到挑戰(zhàn)。但是銀行只是以之作為參與國(guó)際貿(mào)易結(jié)算的保證,本無意于提單項(xiàng)下的貨物,那在這種情形下,提單權(quán)利人對(duì)提單項(xiàng)下的貨物有怎樣的權(quán)利呢?不同的基礎(chǔ)關(guān)系,會(huì)否影響到提單后手持有人的權(quán)利?第四,提單與其所表彰的貨物之間的關(guān)系。提單不同于金錢證券,為一種載貨證券,其下貨物的存在與否對(duì)提單效力會(huì)產(chǎn)生怎樣的影響,從而間接影響提單合法持有人的權(quán)利?通過梳理提單及與其相關(guān)的法律關(guān)系,分析無單放貨項(xiàng)下提單權(quán)利人對(duì)承運(yùn)人主張損害賠償請(qǐng)求權(quán)可能面臨的障礙,可以歸納出在探尋損害賠償請(qǐng)求權(quán)基礎(chǔ)的路上,需要解決提單與運(yùn)輸合同之間的關(guān)系以及提單與貨物之間的關(guān)系,即傳統(tǒng)觀念之提單債權(quán)效力與物權(quán)效力問題。第二部分探尋解決無單放貨問題的請(qǐng)求權(quán)基礎(chǔ),主要圍繞第一部分所提出的問題進(jìn)行解決,以掃清尋找請(qǐng)求權(quán)道路上的障礙。首先,找尋與之相關(guān)的法律規(guī)范。我國(guó)《海商法》沒有作出明確的規(guī)定,《規(guī)定》,賦予了提單持有人可以以違約或侵權(quán)為由,向承運(yùn)人主張損害賠償責(zé)任的權(quán)利。但是《規(guī)定》并未進(jìn)一步規(guī)定或解釋違反的是何約定,侵犯的是何權(quán)利。其次,對(duì)于損害賠償定性之法律未說明的問題,區(qū)分違約與侵權(quán),分別找出其爭(zhēng)議點(diǎn)進(jìn)行探討。一方面,對(duì)于違約之定性,主要爭(zhēng)議在于提單與運(yùn)輸合同之間的關(guān)系,借助于學(xué)說,進(jìn)行分析反思,并試圖與我國(guó)法律相結(jié)合,同時(shí)注重海商事交易習(xí)慣所賦予提單的各項(xiàng)功能,運(yùn)用分析、綜合等邏輯推理的方法,推演合乎法律邏輯及商事現(xiàn)實(shí)的結(jié)果。具體而言,我國(guó)傳統(tǒng)學(xué)說主張合同轉(zhuǎn)讓說與第三人利益合同說,對(duì)之進(jìn)行詳細(xì)的論證并且討論我國(guó)法上適用的可能;對(duì)于近期流行的提單獨(dú)立法律關(guān)系說法,區(qū)分證權(quán)證券性與設(shè)權(quán)證券性進(jìn)行利弊分析,從保障提單流通尊重海商事交易的角度,采設(shè)權(quán)證券性之觀念,并且引用新債清償理論使承運(yùn)人免受雙重賠償風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的同時(shí),對(duì)托運(yùn)人的請(qǐng)求權(quán)也加以保護(hù)。另一方面,對(duì)于侵權(quán)之定性,主要爭(zhēng)議在提單的物權(quán)效力上,我國(guó)學(xué)說上經(jīng)歷了從所有權(quán)憑證到占有憑證的進(jìn)化,比較法學(xué)說上存在絕對(duì)說與代表說之爭(zhēng),擬制占有表征與依當(dāng)事人主觀意思等不同側(cè)重面的論爭(zhēng),對(duì)紛繁之理論,進(jìn)行深入分析其實(shí)質(zhì),并進(jìn)行同異比較,綜合得出與提單設(shè)權(quán)性吻合不悖的提單之?dāng)M制占有功能,同時(shí),著重提單項(xiàng)下國(guó)際貨物買賣法律關(guān)系,分析物權(quán)之變動(dòng)與提單交付之聯(lián)系。具體而言,對(duì)于提單物權(quán)效力,區(qū)分狹義的提單物權(quán)效力與提單項(xiàng)下物權(quán)變動(dòng)效力,即提單合法持有人基于提單本身與貨物之間的關(guān)系,以及提單持有人因提單基礎(chǔ)關(guān)系在提單受讓后取得的對(duì)貨物之權(quán)利,次第分析。第三部分對(duì)無單放貨情形下,提單合法持有人損害賠償請(qǐng)求權(quán)進(jìn)行羅列。在第二部分所得出的損害賠償?shù)亩ㄐ缘幕A(chǔ)上,區(qū)分不同的原給付請(qǐng)求權(quán),判斷承運(yùn)人無單放貨的行為,分別侵犯了提單持有人的何種權(quán)利,并列出該類型權(quán)利受到侵犯時(shí),提單合法持有人得向承運(yùn)人主張損害賠償?shù)臉?gòu)成要件。具體而言,分為三種。第一,基于提單債權(quán)主張違約損害賠償請(qǐng)求權(quán)。第二,基于提單之對(duì)貨物的擬制占有,主張侵占之侵權(quán)損害賠償請(qǐng)求權(quán)。第三,在買賣情形下,提單持有人因有效的買賣基礎(chǔ)法律關(guān)系,取得貨物所有權(quán)的,可基于所有權(quán)被侵害主張損害賠償請(qǐng)求權(quán)。至此,對(duì)于無單放貨類型的糾紛,運(yùn)用損害賠償請(qǐng)求權(quán)思維模式,解說完成。至于,承運(yùn)人可能提出的抗辯,并為實(shí)踐中錯(cuò)誤得被肯定的一些具體問題,大都在前一部分理論運(yùn)用構(gòu)建的過程中進(jìn)行了解說,本部分不再贅述。
[Abstract]:Bill of lading is in the process of transportation issued by the carrier form, but its role in the economic activities is not only reflected in the phase of transportation, its dwelling activity state determines the international sale of goods, carriage of goods by sea and the letter of credit and other economic activities are the connecting factor, legal relationship between the perplexing. Under the compensation for damage has become a major problem in the field of shipping goods claim. But the delivery of goods without dispute is common in the carriage of goods by sea, according to the International Maritime Committee (CMI) 2000 statistics, the delivery of goods without the phenomenon of liner 15%, the Charter reached 50%, and some important commodities such as oil, minerals and even trading up to 100%. with the rapid development of navigation technology, greatly accelerate the speed of the international transport of goods, bills of lading transfer rate in many cases has not complied with the cargo transportation speed, in order to reduce the storage The cost of goods, port evacuation to avoid the backlog of pressure, solve the urgent delivery of the consignee of today, emerge in an endless stream of delivery without original bill of lading phenomenon, no single delivery dispute cases increased year by year, the holder of the bill of rights relief is necessary. However, in the delivery of goods without damage, China's "maritime law" no definite provisions, although there are also many theoretical discussion, but the view is not uniform, and more concentrated in the nature of real right or creditor's bill of lading, studied the function of academic, relatively strong, great reference value, but because of the current research is to study the bill of lading a legal point. In solving practical problems is difficult to directly apply. Although the delivery of goods without damages in order to solve the qualitative problems, the Supreme People's Court promulgated the "Supreme People's Court on the trial of the goods without original bill of lading delivery The provisions on Several Issues concerning the application of laws in cases of things, gives the holder of the bill of lading breach of contract or tort claim for damages. "But did not further regulations or provisions on the interpretation of what is the breach of the agreement, is a violation of rights, so that the application of chaos. This paper intends to use the method of claim basis, explore under the bill of lading bill of lading what is the right holder of the carrier, and then discuss further violation of the original right to request payment of the first payment request to the right, in order to explain the process to be reasonable, reduce the randomness. The article is divided into three parts, the first part mainly introduces the origin of non delivery of goods, commercial transactions and combing the bill of lading involved. Analysis of the main legal relationship and on the basis of the bill of lading related, further put forward the problems may be encountered in the process of dispute resolution. Like Paodingjieniu, only on the structure of cattle The texture on top of, in order to cope with, so it is legal, especially for bill of lading legal issues related to multiple transaction relation law is even more so, only in grinding sword law is not enough, we must master the law of commercial transactions, the transaction legal identify the crux of, it may be more effective to solve the problem. Implement, involves the legal relationship of bill of lading are mainly the following: first, the legal relationship between the bill of lading itself. The legal relationship between the carrier and the consignee is the lawful possession of the bill of lading bill of lading issued, the two parties as the basic legal relationship between the parties of the bill of lading. On the basis of the legal relationship, legal bill of lading holders by one-way carrier cargo claim right to request delivery and the right to request payment, and pay the bill of lading on record carrier shall perform the obligation; see the bill of lading bill of lading holds a one-way People have the obligation to deliver the goods, and bill of lading recorded rights. Second, the relationship between the reason that the bill of lading, namely the contract of carriage of goods by sea. In the case of CIF, the contract of carriage of goods by sea is the shipper (goods) and contract signed by the carrier. According to the contract, the goods may request the carrier issuing the bill of lading and according to the bill of lading will deliver the goods to the lawful holder of bill of lading, and undertake the obligation of contract; the carrier has the obligation of contract to transport the goods to the port of destination delivered to holders of bill of lading, and enjoy contract rights. The bill of lading in the contract of carriage of goods by sea duty and responsibility between the carrier and the shipper seems to happen some specific changes, what impact will be? And the contract of carriage of goods by sea as the reason, the impact on the legal relation of the bill of lading, the bill of lading legal relationship Is the rights and obligations of the holder of the bill of lading to perform accurate and whether the rights be guaranteed and how to be protected, and is also the purpose of the study, analysis of the center of gravity. The third basic relations, bill of lading endorsement or delivery, including the original contract for the international sale of goods, the sale of maritime transport of goods in transit, the letter of credit to CIF and so on. Business as an example, the parties to accept the delivery of bill of lading as the delivery of goods, according to the contract, bill of lading is obliged to hand hold before the bill of lading endorsement or delivery to and have to hand hand, should pay the price of the transferee of bill of lading right; enjoy the right of claim of the forward hand delivery of the bill of lading (after acceptance the bill of lading as acceptance of goods, at the same time as) for payment obligations. It should explore is, according to the bill of lading delivery, in addition to access rights on the bill of lading, whether the bill of lading The goods under the right to obtain what, right? In addition, you should also note that under the bill of lading in addition to the basic legal relationship, legal documents trading relationship, there are other related documents transfer, in his case, bill of lading right of goods under the bill of lading has what rights? For example in the settlement, the use of credit mode occasions, bill of lading first transferred to the bank for negotiation under the letter of credit payment, the bank will become the lawful holder of bill of lading bill of lading. If you do not give the lawful holder of bill of lading as Bank of independent claim to the carrier, the bank's legal interests will be difficult to be guaranteed. Referred to as "the lifeline of international trade" credit system will be challenged. But just as banks involved in international trade settlement guarantee, this is not the goods under the bill of lading, that in this kind of situation Form, bill of lading right to the goods under the bill of lading has what rights? Based different relations, will affect the rights of the bill of lading with? Fourth, the relationship between bill of lading and the recognition of the goods. The bill of lading is different from the money stock, a bill of lading, the presence of the goods the effect of the bill of lading will produce what kind of impact, and thus indirectly affect the lawful holder of bill of lading right? By combing the bill of lading and related legal relationship analysis, no rights under the bill of lading delivery of goods to the carrier that the claim for damages may face obstacles, can be summed up in the way of right of claim for damages based on the needs of to solve the relationship between bill of lading and the transport contract, bill of lading and goods, namely the traditional concept of the bill of lading the obligation and the real effect. The second part is to explore the solution to the delivery of goods without asking The right of claim problems, mainly around the first part proposed to resolve the problems, to clear the obstacles on the road to find the claim. First of all, find legal norms relating to China's Maritime Law >. < < no definite provisions, provisions on, gives the holder of the bill of lading to breach of contract or tort. The carrier to claim damages liability rights. But the provisions did not further provisions or < > interpretation is a violation of any agreement, is a violation of any rights. Secondly, the law of compensation for damages of qualitative description of the problem, to distinguish between tort and breach respectively to find out the point of controversy is discussed. On the one hand, for breach of the qualitative the main argument is that, the relationship between bill of lading and the contract of carriage, by means of theory analysis, reflection, and tries to combine with the law of our country, various functions and focus on maritime trading habits with the use of bill of lading, Method of comprehensive analysis, such as logical reasoning, legal logic deduction and commercial reality results. In particular, China's traditional theory that the contract and the transfer of contracts for the benefit of the third person said, carried on the detailed demonstration and discussion for our country may be; for the recent popular independent legal relationship between the bill of lading, the rights of securities and power securities of the advantages and disadvantages, from the protection of maritime trade bill of lading circulation respect angle, mining power securities of ideas, and refer to the new debt settlement theory makes the carrier from Double Indemnity risks at the same time, the right to request the shipper is protected. On the other hand, for infringement the main qualitative controversy on the property validity of the bill of lading, the legal theory of our country has experienced from the ownership certificate to the certificate of possession of evolution, comparative law theory on the absolute and representative point, to share the table In accordance with the parties sign and the subjective meaning and different emphasis on the controversy of numerous theory, in-depth analysis of its essence, and gives a comprehensive comparison between, and bill of lading establishing rights agreement not contrary to the bill of lading to share function, at the same time, focus on the international sale of goods under the bill of lading legal relationship, contact analysis of real right change with the delivery of the bill of lading. Specifically, the bill of lading bill of lading to distinguish the effectiveness of real right, real right narrow and under the bill of lading bill of lading is the change of real right effect, the relationship between itself and the lawful holder of bill of lading of goods based on the basis of the bill of lading and the holder of the bill of lading relations in the bill of lading of goods after the transfer of rights, the third part of the sequence analysis. Delivery of goods without the bill of lading under the lawful holder of the claim for damages were listed. Based on the second part of the qualitative compensation for damage on the original to distinguish different Pay the right to request, determine the delivery of goods without bill of lading, respectively violated what rights holder of the bill of lading, and lists the types of rights are violated, the constitutive requirements of bill of lading legal holder claims compensation from the carrier damage. Specifically, divided into three types. First, based on the bill of lading claims for breach of contract claim for damages. Second, based on the preparation of the possession of the goods on bill of lading, the right of compensation for tort claims. On third, in the sales situation, the holder of the bill of lading is effectively the sale of basic legal relationship, obtain ownership of the goods, can claim ownership is against the right to claim damages. Based on this, for the delivery of goods without the types of disputes, use the right of compensation for the damage mode of thinking, interpretation. As for the carrier, may put forward defense, and some specific problems in practice is wrong for sure, mostly in the first part In the process of the construction of the theory, the explanation is carried out, and this part is no longer described.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：D922.294

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王炳蔚;試述提單持有人的概念、識(shí)別及我國(guó)的立法建議[J];天津市政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2005年01期

2 李志文;論提單持有人及其權(quán)利、義務(wù)和責(zé)任[J];中國(guó)海商法年刊;2001年00期

3 王曉林;;合同當(dāng)事人抑或合同第三人——關(guān)于合法提單持有人法律地位的探究[J];安徽大學(xué)法律評(píng)論;2010年02期

4 鄭梁;論我國(guó)《海商法》中“提單持有人”的內(nèi)涵限定與外延拓展[J];世界海運(yùn);2005年06期

5 顧玲娜;;論提單轉(zhuǎn)讓下提單持有人的訴權(quán)[J];經(jīng)營(yíng)管理者;2009年23期

6 林青濤;;論提單持有人訴權(quán)的法理基礎(chǔ)[J];海大法律評(píng)論;2007年00期

7 李勤昌;海運(yùn)提單持有人索賠權(quán)問題研究[J];黑龍江對(duì)外經(jīng)貿(mào);2005年05期

8 沈濤;;論提單持有人與承運(yùn)人之間債權(quán)債務(wù)關(guān)系[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)研究導(dǎo)刊;2007年08期

9 鄭蕾;試析海上貨物運(yùn)輸合同對(duì)第三人的效力[J];中國(guó)海商法年刊;1998年00期

10 孫婷;;試論提單持有人的訴權(quán)歸宿[J];全國(guó)商情(理論研究);2014年07期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前4條

1 鄧瑾;;論并入提單仲裁條款對(duì)提單持有人的效力[A];2008全國(guó)博士生學(xué)術(shù)論壇（國(guó)際法）論文集——國(guó)際公法、國(guó)際私法分冊(cè)[C];2008年

2 劉昌國(guó);李業(yè)斌;;在航次租船合同下,出租人／承運(yùn)人向提單持有人／收貨人索賠的訴訟時(shí)效如何認(rèn)定之我見[A];中國(guó)律師2004年海商法研討會(huì)暨中華全國(guó)律師協(xié)會(huì)海商海事專業(yè)委員會(huì)年會(huì)論文集[C];2004年

3 李連君;;承運(yùn)人是否對(duì)無提單放貨有有效的答辯權(quán)——試論英國(guó),香港,新加坡與此問題有關(guān)的法律與實(shí)踐[A];中國(guó)律師2001海商研討會(huì)論文集[C];2001年

4 徐富斌;;承運(yùn)人留置權(quán)的成立、排除和限制[A];中國(guó)律師2002海商研討會(huì)論文集[C];2002年

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前8條

1 林瑞云;略論提單持有人訴權(quán)的依據(jù)[N];人民法院報(bào);2001年

2 上海海事法院海事庭 潘燕;提單持有人向誰提起訴訟：無單放貨人？無單提貨人？[N];國(guó)際商報(bào);2008年

3 北京昌明律師事務(wù)所 蔣五四;無提單放貨行為的性質(zhì)問題[N];國(guó)際經(jīng)貿(mào)消息;2001年

4 北京大成律師事務(wù)所律師、高級(jí)合伙人 王英波;防范經(jīng)濟(jì)不景氣中的國(guó)際貿(mào)易欺詐[N];經(jīng)濟(jì)參考報(bào);2012年

5 石杰;貨物被無單提走該向誰索賠[N];國(guó)際商報(bào);2005年

6 ;運(yùn)費(fèi)訴訟期限有多長(zhǎng)[N];國(guó)際商報(bào);2002年

7 上海海事法院 莢振坤;集裝箱運(yùn)輸條件下目的港倉(cāng)庫(kù)火災(zāi)的免責(zé)問題[N];國(guó)際商報(bào);2006年

8 上海市海華永泰律師事務(wù)所 萬曉芳 律師;承運(yùn)人之留置權(quán)探討[N];國(guó)際商報(bào);2006年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 李妍;提單持有人權(quán)利義務(wù)源泉研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2010年

2 金榮株;海上貨物運(yùn)輸提單持有人相關(guān)法律問題的研究[D];上海海事大學(xué);2005年

3 楊倩;提單持有人訴權(quán)制度研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2011年

4 馮超;國(guó)際海上貨物運(yùn)輸合同第三人法律問題研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2004年

5 林瑞云;略論托運(yùn)人和提單持有人訴權(quán)[D];廈門大學(xué);2001年

6 夏亮;海上貨物運(yùn)輸合同第三方當(dāng)事人地位研究[D];上海海事大學(xué);2007年

7 郝明;無單放貨項(xiàng)下提單持有人損害賠償請(qǐng)求權(quán)基礎(chǔ)探尋[D];華東政法大學(xué);2015年

8 謝玉軍;海上貨物運(yùn)輸合同涉及第三人利益問題的研究[D];上海海事大學(xué);2006年

9 張麗敏;國(guó)際海上貨物運(yùn)輸合同下的訴權(quán)問題研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2004年

10 張朝暉;國(guó)際海上貨物運(yùn)輸合同收貨人相關(guān)法律問題研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2005年

，

本文編號(hào)：1450701