期租下停租條款的法律問題研究
發(fā)布時間：2018-05-25 08:25
本文選題：風(fēng)險分?jǐn)?/strong> + 近因原則��； 參考：《上海海事大學(xué)》2006年碩士論文
【摘要】：停租條款(Off-Hire Clause)幾乎是每一個期租合同都要訂明的條款，該條款規(guī)定在一些特定的情況下承租人可以中止履行其支付租金的義務(wù)。而按照英美普通法，在租期內(nèi)承租人持續(xù)不斷的準(zhǔn)時支付租金的義務(wù)是絕對的。承租人不得以任何理由拖延、拒付或扣減到期租金，即承租人應(yīng)獨(dú)自承擔(dān)租期內(nèi)一切時間損失風(fēng)險。但對承租人而言，其支付租金的目的在于換取船舶能為其提供最有效的服務(wù)，，因此如果船舶不能夠做到這一點(diǎn)卻仍然要承租人履行支付租金的絕對義務(wù)是勉為其難的。為保護(hù)自己的利益，轉(zhuǎn)嫁部分的時間損失風(fēng)險，承租人往往要在期租合同中訂入停租條款。由于在實(shí)踐中常有對停租條款中承租雙方權(quán)利義務(wù)的爭議，因此正確理解這一條款有一定實(shí)際意義。由于實(shí)踐中NYPE 46使用得較多，故本文基本上就是以NYPE為基礎(chǔ)，比較各期租標(biāo)準(zhǔn)合同中停租條款的規(guī)定，并兼論中國海商法的有關(guān)規(guī)定。 第一章分析了停租的概念和來源，具體的停租事項(xiàng)及主要定期租約范本之間的區(qū)別。 第二章就停租條款的解釋和分類，筆者分析延遲(Delay)和滯留(Detention)二者之間的區(qū)別及其區(qū)別的重要性，然后結(jié)合案例分析條款里的“立即需要的服務(wù)、阻止了船舶的完全工作”，以及凈時間損失條款和期間停租條款的區(qū)別。 第三章筆者針對停租條款的法律屬性進(jìn)行闡述，而為了闡述的系統(tǒng)性，先對定期租約以及租金的法律屬性簡單地作一介紹，繼而分析停租條款的法律屬性。停租條款是不論過失或違約條款(No fault provision，即無論是誰的過錯，只要出現(xiàn)合同中列明的停租事項(xiàng)，承租人即可主張停租條款所賦予的權(quán)利，停止支付相應(yīng)的租金，出租人不得以其履約中沒有過失作為其抗辯的理由。停租條款，作為一種除外條款(Being in the nature of an exception)，按照英美普通法的觀點(diǎn)，如果解釋起來有爭議，應(yīng)作不利于租家的解釋，因?yàn)樵摋l款是針對其純獲利益。 停租制度租家沒有義務(wù)合理處理降低損失或者返還其它節(jié)省的費(fèi)用，與損害賠償完全不同。停租條款的目的是減輕租家租期內(nèi)由于沒有使用船舶而不間斷支付租金的義務(wù)，條款不需要停稚事項(xiàng)必須是由船東的過失造成。相反，該條款強(qiáng)調(diào)的是實(shí)際風(fēng)險分?jǐn)倵l款。 另外以前有觀點(diǎn)認(rèn)為行使停租是承租人行使同時履行抗辯權(quán)，而從舉證責(zé)任、合同義務(wù)兩方面就可以看出簡單地把停租看作是承租人行使同時履行抗辯權(quán)是不恰當(dāng)?shù)�，筆者認(rèn)為只能說是行使抗辯權(quán)的一種。 第四章筆者用近因原則來分析停租事項(xiàng)的真正原因，在何種情況下，何種原
[Abstract]:Termination clause Off-Hire Clauseis a clause stipulated in almost every term lease contract, which provides that the lessee may suspend his obligation to pay rent under certain circumstances. Under Anglo-American common law, the lessee's constant obligation to pay rent on time during the lease period is absolute. The lessee shall not, for any reason, delay, refuse to pay or deduct the due rent, that is, the lessee shall bear the risk of loss at all times during the lease period alone. But for the charterer, the purpose of paying rent is to exchange the ship for the most effective service, so it is difficult for the charterer to fulfill the absolute obligation of paying rent if the ship can not do this. In order to protect their own interests and transfer part of the risk of time loss, the lessee often has to make a termination clause in the term lease contract. Since there are disputes about the rights and obligations of both parties in the clause of termination of lease in practice, it is of certain practical significance to correctly understand this clause. Because NYPE 46 is widely used in practice, this paper is basically based on NYPE to compare the provisions of the termination clause in the standard lease contract of each period, and also to discuss the relevant provisions of China's maritime law. The first chapter analyzes the concept and source of the termination of lease, the specific termination of lease and the difference between the main model term lease. In the second chapter, the author analyzes the difference and the importance of the difference between Delayand Detention.Then, combined with the "immediate service" in the case study clause, it prevents the ship from working completely. And the difference between the net time loss clause and the term termination clause. In the third chapter, the author expounds the legal attributes of the termination clause, and in order to elaborate the systematicness, the author introduces the term lease and the legal attribute of the rent simply, and then analyzes the legal attribute of the termination clause. The cessation clause is no fault provisioning regardless of fault or breach of contract, that is, no matter who is at fault, the lessee may claim the right conferred by the cessation clause and cease to pay the corresponding rent as long as there is a cessation of lease as specified in the contract. The lessor shall not invoke the absence of fault in its performance as its defence. A termination clause, as an exception to being in the nature of an exception, should, in the common law view, be interpreted to the detriment of the tenant if it is controversial, since it is aimed at its net benefit. The rent-stopping system has no obligation to reduce losses or return other saved expenses, which is completely different from damages. The purpose of the cessation clause is to reduce the obligation of the charterer to pay the rent without interruption for the absence of use of the ship during the lease period, and the clause does not require the cessation of any matter which must be caused by the fault of the shipowner. Instead, it emphasizes the actual risk allocation clause. In addition, in the past, there was a view that the exercise of rent-stopping is the exercise of the lessee's right of defense at the same time, and from the burden of proof and the contractual obligation, one can see that it is inappropriate to simply regard the termination of lease as the exercise of the lessee's right of defense at the same time. I think that can only be said to exercise a right of defense. In the fourth chapter, the author uses the principle of proximal cause to analyze the real cause of the termination of rent, under what circumstances, what is the original
【學(xué)位授予單位】：上海海事大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2006
【分類號】：D922.294
【參考文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前2條
1 張永堅(jiān);;淺議船舶運(yùn)費(fèi)/租金的支付[J];中國海商法年刊;1990年00期
2 郭萍;試論延滯損失的幾個法律問題[J];中國海商法年刊;1997年00期
本文編號：1932760
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/sflw/1932760.html
最近更新
教材專著
