本文選題：票據(jù)占有　切入點：票據(jù)喪失　出處：《延邊大學》2007年碩士論文

【摘要】： 票據(jù)喪失是票據(jù)流轉(zhuǎn)中的異常情況，票據(jù)作為設(shè)權(quán)證券和提示證券，喪失票據(jù)就喪失了行使票據(jù)權(quán)利的憑證，票據(jù)喪失后還經(jīng)常伴隨著一系列的程序問題和實體問題。由于票據(jù)法獨特的技術(shù)規(guī)則，與民商法的一般理論存在較大差異，加上法規(guī)本身的抽象性，失票救濟領(lǐng)域存在較多爭議問題和模糊規(guī)定。民事訴訟法以列舉方式界定票據(jù)喪失，既不夠全面，，也難以明確喪失的構(gòu)成要件。而搞清楚票據(jù)喪失的責任及風險的承擔，研究在票據(jù)喪失的情況下，如何進行相應補救，如何更好地保護自己的權(quán)益，規(guī)避和轉(zhuǎn)嫁風險，不僅是經(jīng)濟界，法律界人士需要解決的問題，而且是每個票據(jù)關(guān)系參加者都急切關(guān)注的問題。 以往，關(guān)于票據(jù)喪失及補救的諸多研究多側(cè)重于對票據(jù)權(quán)利人喪失票據(jù)的情況進行研究，各國法律也多從法律制度上為票據(jù)權(quán)利人設(shè)置一些救濟方法和程序。但是，現(xiàn)實生活中，還存在著許多非票據(jù)權(quán)利人喪失票據(jù)的情況，以及對善意的第三人利益保護的問題，不對這些現(xiàn)象進行研究，不對這些特殊的利害關(guān)系人進行救濟，不能不說是一種遺憾和缺漏。 同時，由于票據(jù)法的博大精深，以及票據(jù)規(guī)則的特殊性、法律條文的抽象性等因素，票據(jù)喪失救濟領(lǐng)域存在著爭議多、法規(guī)語義模糊的問題。雖然近年理論界對票據(jù)法的研究不斷增多，研究的程度也不斷深入，票據(jù)法的專著和論文不斷涌現(xiàn)，但就筆者搜集的現(xiàn)有資料看，學者對票據(jù)喪失的救濟問題缺乏足夠的重視，缺乏對票據(jù)喪失救濟問題的系統(tǒng)研究，對此問題進行深入研究的也不夠多。深化對票據(jù)喪失現(xiàn)象的認識，研究對各種喪失票據(jù)者的救濟方法，不僅是必要的，而且是急需的。 本文由緒論，票據(jù)喪失救濟制度的一般原理，國際公約中的票據(jù)喪失救濟制度及價值取向，我國對的票據(jù)喪失的救濟，以及我國票據(jù)喪失救濟制度的進一步完善和結(jié)論六章構(gòu)成。全文主干分為四部分，從票據(jù)喪失救濟制度的一般原理入手，對票據(jù)的占有及票據(jù)的喪失進行了分類并對相關(guān)問題進行了界定(第二章)。對與票據(jù)的喪失聯(lián)系最為緊密的票據(jù)的偽造問題進行了研究。概述了國際公約中的票據(jù)喪失救濟制度及價值取向，并以比較的方法分析了我國與英美法系和日內(nèi)瓦統(tǒng)一票據(jù)法體系在制度規(guī)定上的主要區(qū)別(第三章)。從研究實體問題的角度，對我國的票據(jù)喪失救濟制度及現(xiàn)存的規(guī)定模糊及爭議問題進行評析。針對現(xiàn)實生活中，非票據(jù)權(quán)利人失去對票據(jù)直接控制的情形，探究對非票據(jù)權(quán)利人喪失票據(jù)的救濟方法。深化對票據(jù)喪失現(xiàn)象的認識，研究對各種喪失票據(jù)者的失票救濟途徑，進而探析我國票據(jù)喪失的救濟制度如何進一步完善的問題(第四章)。
[Abstract]:The loss of a bill is an abnormal situation in the circulation of a bill. The loss of the instrument, as an authorized security and a prompt security, results in the loss of the certificate of exercise of the right to the negotiable instrument. After the bill is lost, there are often a series of procedural and substantive problems. Due to the unique technical rules of the instrument law, there is a great difference from the general theory of civil and commercial law, and the abstract nature of the law itself. There are many controversial problems and vague provisions in the field of the relief of lost tickets. The Civil procedure Law defines the loss of instruments by enumeration, which is neither comprehensive nor clear about the constitutive elements of the loss, and makes clear the responsibility of the loss of bills and the bearing of risks. It is not only a problem for the economic and legal professionals to solve the problem of how to remedy the loss of bills, how to better protect their own rights and interests, and how to avoid and transfer risks. And it is a matter of urgent concern to every participant in the bill relationship. In the past, many studies on the loss and remedy of bills focused on the situation of bill holders losing their instruments, and the laws of various countries also set up some relief methods and procedures for the holders of bill rights from the legal system. In real life, there are still many cases of non-bill holders losing their instruments, and the problems of protecting the interests of bona fide third parties, not studying these phenomena, and not providing relief to these special interested parties. Can not but say is a kind of regret and omission. At the same time, due to the broad and profound bill law, as well as the particularity of the bill rules, the abstract nature of the legal provisions and other factors, there are many disputes in the field of bill loss relief. Although in recent years the theoretical circle has been increasing the research on the law of negotiable instruments, the degree of the study is also deepening, the monographs and papers on the law of instruments have been emerging constantly, but from the view of the existing data collected by the author, Scholars do not pay enough attention to the relief problem of bill loss, lack of systematic research on the relief problem of bill loss, and do not have enough in-depth research on this problem, so as to deepen the understanding of the phenomenon of bill loss. It is not only necessary, but also urgent, to study the remedies for the disenfranchised. This article is based on the introduction, the general principles of the bill loss relief system, the relief system and value orientation of the instrument loss in international conventions, and the relief of the bill loss in our country. The main body of this paper is divided into four parts, starting with the general principle of bill loss relief system. This paper classifies the possession and loss of the instrument and defines the related problems (Chapter II). The paper studies the counterfeiting of the instrument which is most closely related to the loss of the instrument, and summarizes the ticket in the international convention. According to the loss of relief system and value orientation, It also analyzes the main differences between our country and the common law system and the uniform instrument law system in Geneva (Chapter three) from the point of view of the study of substantive issues, and analyzes the main differences between China and the Anglo-American law system and the unified instrument law system in Geneva (Chapter three). This paper makes an analysis of the relief system of bill loss in our country and the existing fuzzy and controversial issues. In view of the real life, the non-bill holder loses direct control over the bill. To probe into the relief methods for non-bill holders to lose their bills, to deepen their understanding of the phenomenon of the loss of bills, and to study the ways to remedy the loss of bills for those who have lost their bills, And then analyze the problem of how to perfect the relief system of bill loss in China (Chapter IV).
【學位授予單位】：延邊大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2007
【分類號】：D996.2;D922.287

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 陳月秀;論我國空白票據(jù)制度的立法完善[J];廣州大學學報(綜合版);2001年03期

2 袁方,路雪林;淺議票據(jù)喪失的補救措施[J];焦作工學院學報;1997年01期

3 姜吾梅;空白票據(jù)的效力及其公示催告[J];經(jīng)濟師;2001年07期

4 張玉慶;談票據(jù)喪失后票據(jù)權(quán)利補救的有關(guān)問題[J];農(nóng)金縱橫;1998年01期

5 屠世超;空白票據(jù)法律問題探析[J];紹興文理學院學報(哲學社會科學版);1999年02期

6 朱伯玉;論空白票據(jù)喪失后的公示催告[J];天津市政法管理干部學院學報;2001年03期

7 謝石松;論空白票據(jù)的有關(guān)法律問題[J];現(xiàn)代法學;1996年06期

8 于曉寧;試析空白票據(jù)喪失后的公示催告[J];新金融;2001年03期

9 李玨;空白票據(jù)的公示催告之淺析[J];政法論叢;2000年02期

10 劉良軍;中外票據(jù)喪失補救方法之比較[J];政法論叢;1998年04期

本文編號：1677522