【摘要】：最高額抵押權(quán)作為擔(dān)保抵押制度中的一種特殊形式,具有一般抵押權(quán)所不具備的制度優(yōu)越性。從其發(fā)展歷程來(lái)看,最高額抵押權(quán)是在商品經(jīng)濟(jì)社會(huì)環(huán)境下,應(yīng)融資需求,從一般抵押權(quán)中演變而來(lái)。隨著經(jīng)濟(jì)活動(dòng)的日益頻繁,實(shí)踐中不斷出現(xiàn)連續(xù)性的交易現(xiàn)象,進(jìn)而對(duì)最高額抵押權(quán)這種高效便捷的抵押方式的應(yīng)用需求日益迫切,成為金融機(jī)構(gòu)、公司廣泛采用的擔(dān)保形式。但是,在我國(guó)法律制度中最高額抵押權(quán)卻仍處于邊緣地位,《擔(dān)保法》中有關(guān)最高額抵押權(quán)的規(guī)定相對(duì)粗略,《物權(quán)法》在內(nèi)容上進(jìn)行了完善,但與域外相關(guān)法律制度相比,仍存在一些局限與弊端,因制度缺陷而引發(fā)的最高額抵押糾紛亦有持續(xù)增加的趨勢(shì)。本文通過(guò)對(duì)比分析域內(nèi)外最高額抵押權(quán)的概念、內(nèi)容及制度價(jià)值,在反思我國(guó)最高額抵押權(quán)的局限性的基礎(chǔ)上,并結(jié)合實(shí)踐對(duì)我國(guó)最高額抵押制度的應(yīng)然性進(jìn)行探析。除了導(dǎo)論和結(jié)語(yǔ),全文共分三個(gè)部分:第一部分即第二章,從剖析最高額抵押權(quán)的概念出發(fā),分析最高額抵押權(quán)除了具備一般抵押權(quán)的基本特征外,還具有以下特征;擔(dān)保債權(quán)具有不確定性,具有特殊的從屬性,設(shè)立時(shí)需要約定決算期以及最高限額。結(jié)合最高額抵押制度的歷史沿革,對(duì)最高額抵押權(quán)的制度價(jià)值進(jìn)行分析。第二部分是第三章,對(duì)域外最高額抵押制度與我國(guó)相關(guān)立法在最高額抵押權(quán)的設(shè)定、變更、轉(zhuǎn)讓、確定等方面的立法規(guī)定的差異進(jìn)行了分析研究,旨在尋求域外法律制度中的可借鑒之處。關(guān)于最高額抵押權(quán)的設(shè)定,主要分析了域內(nèi)外有關(guān)最高額抵押權(quán)擔(dān)保的債權(quán)范圍、設(shè)定以及登記的相關(guān)制度差異。轉(zhuǎn)讓方面從被擔(dān)保債權(quán)的轉(zhuǎn)讓及最高額抵押權(quán)的轉(zhuǎn)讓兩個(gè)方面對(duì)域外的相關(guān)制度進(jìn)行了比較,并結(jié)合我國(guó)《物權(quán)法》的相關(guān)規(guī)定分析最高額抵押權(quán)的轉(zhuǎn)讓規(guī)則。對(duì)于最高額抵押權(quán)的確定,在對(duì)確定的必要性進(jìn)行分析的前提下重點(diǎn)研究了最高額抵押權(quán)確定的原因以及確定后的效果。第三部分是本文的第四章,闡述我國(guó)最高額抵押權(quán)在實(shí)踐中暴露出的制度弊端,主要體現(xiàn)在:登記方式并無(wú)明確規(guī)定,影響最高額抵押權(quán)的及時(shí)生效;變更缺乏明確的限制機(jī)制,加劇了其他債權(quán)人實(shí)現(xiàn)債權(quán)的風(fēng)險(xiǎn);過(guò)度限制轉(zhuǎn)讓,不利于實(shí)現(xiàn)簡(jiǎn)化融資交易的制度價(jià)值;最高額抵押權(quán)的確定需待決算期屆滿,阻礙了被擔(dān)保債權(quán)的及時(shí)實(shí)現(xiàn)。對(duì)此我國(guó)立法應(yīng)當(dāng)全面從最高額抵押權(quán)的設(shè)立、變更、轉(zhuǎn)讓等方面進(jìn)行制度完善,并借鑒國(guó)外先進(jìn)的立法經(jīng)驗(yàn),建立最高額抵押的衡平制度,以此進(jìn)一步完善我國(guó)的最高額抵押制度。
[Abstract]:As a special form of the security mortgage system, the maximum mortgage has the system superiority which the general mortgage does not have. From its development course, the highest mortgage is the demand for financing, which evolved from the general mortgage under the social environment of commodity economy. With the increasing frequency of economic activities, continuous transactions continue to appear in practice, and then the demand for the application of maximum mortgage, an efficient and convenient mortgage, is becoming more and more urgent, and it has become a widely used form of guarantee for financial institutions and companies. However, the maximum mortgage in the legal system of our country is still on the edge. The provisions of the guarantee Law on the maximum mortgage are relatively rough. The property Law has improved the content, but compared with the relevant foreign legal system, There are still some limitations and drawbacks, and the maximum mortgage disputes caused by system defects are also increasing. Based on the comparative analysis of the concept, content and institutional value of the maximum mortgage in China, this paper analyzes the necessity of the maximum mortgage system in China on the basis of reflecting on the limitations of the maximum mortgage in China. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, the full text is divided into three parts: the first part is the second chapter, from the analysis of the concept of maximum mortgage, the analysis of the maximum mortgage in addition to the basic characteristics of the general mortgage, but also the following characteristics; The secured creditor's right has uncertainty and special subordinate attribute. When it is set up, it needs to specify the final account period and the maximum limit. Combined with the historical evolution of the maximum mortgage system, this paper analyzes the system value of the maximum mortgage. The second part is the third chapter, which analyzes and studies the differences between the overseas maximum mortgage system and the relevant legislation of our country in the aspects of the establishment, change, transfer and determination of the maximum mortgage. The purpose of this paper is to find out what can be used for reference in the foreign legal system. With regard to the establishment of the maximum mortgage, this paper mainly analyzes the scope of the creditor's right, the establishment and the system difference of the registration of the maximum mortgage guarantee inside and outside the domain. In the aspect of assignment, this paper compares the relevant systems outside China from two aspects: the transfer of secured claims and the transfer of maximum mortgage, and analyzes the transfer rules of maximum mortgage in combination with the relevant provisions of the property Law of our country. On the basis of the analysis of the necessity of the determination of the maximum mortgage, this paper focuses on the reasons for the determination of the maximum mortgage and the effect of the determination. The third part is the fourth chapter of this paper, which expounds the drawbacks of the system exposed in the practice of the maximum mortgage in our country, which is mainly reflected in the following aspects: there is no clear regulation on the way of registration, which affects the timely entry into force of the maximum mortgage; The lack of a clear restriction mechanism aggravates the risk of other creditors to achieve claims, excessive restrictions on transfers are not conducive to the realization of simplified financing transactions of institutional value; The determination of the maximum mortgage right needs to expire, which hinders the realization of the secured creditor's right in time. In view of this, the legislation of our country should perfect the system from the aspects of the establishment, change and transfer of the maximum mortgage in an all-round way, and draw lessons from the advanced legislative experience of foreign countries, and establish the equity system of the maximum mortgage. In order to further improve the maximum mortgage system in China.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉林財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：D923.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前6條

1 許明月;;論現(xiàn)代擔(dān)保市場(chǎng)法律規(guī)制的理念與模式[J];中國(guó)法學(xué);2013年06期

2 尹田;;抵押權(quán)效力若干問(wèn)題研究[J];河南財(cái)經(jīng)政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2013年01期

3 郭明瑞;;關(guān)于共同抵押權(quán)的若干問(wèn)題[J];北方法學(xué);2012年01期

4 王全弟;盛宏觀;;抵押權(quán)順位升進(jìn)主義與固定主義之選擇[J];法學(xué);2008年04期

5 孫鵬;;論擔(dān)保物權(quán)的實(shí)行期間[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2007年06期

6 許明月;;抵押物轉(zhuǎn)讓的立法模式選擇與制度安排——兼論我國(guó)擔(dān)保物權(quán)立法對(duì)抵押權(quán)滌除制度的取舍[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2006年02期

，

本文編號(hào)：2472386