本文選題：解約權(quán) + 預(yù)期違約�。� 參考：《上海海運(yùn)學(xué)院》2001年碩士論文

【摘要】： 航次租船合同是合同領(lǐng)域一種比較特殊的法律現(xiàn)象。其構(gòu)成較具特色又極具國(guó)際性的海商法律與慣例體系的一部分，同時(shí)又受到各國(guó)合同法規(guī)定的調(diào)整及合同自由原則的影響，因此，包含很多比較復(fù)雜的法律問(wèn)題。本文論述的焦點(diǎn)，航次租船合同當(dāng)事人的解約權(quán)即為其中之一。同時(shí)，因?yàn)楹酱巫獯贤麓榜偼b貨港裝貨開(kāi)始前的履行階段極具航次租船合同的特點(diǎn)并較易產(chǎn)生各種爭(zhēng)議，本文的討論主要集中在這一階段。另外，在論述的方法上，本文除了一般的敘述與議論外，主要比較了我國(guó)與英國(guó)在這一領(lǐng)域法律規(guī)定的異同，前者是我國(guó)的國(guó)內(nèi)法，而后者，應(yīng)該說(shuō)，由于眾所周知的各種原因，代表了國(guó)際上在這個(gè)領(lǐng)域的主流觀點(diǎn)。 本文可以分為五個(gè)部分，分別構(gòu)成了本文主體的五章。 第一章論述了英國(guó)法與中國(guó)法下行使解約權(quán)的依據(jù)。在這兩國(guó)法律下，，合同當(dāng)事人行使解約權(quán)的依據(jù)都可分為法定與約定兩種。后者來(lái)自于合同當(dāng)事人在合同中的約定，而前者則來(lái)自于法律的直接規(guī)定。無(wú)論是英國(guó)法還是中國(guó)法，解約權(quán)的法定依據(jù)主要都來(lái)自于合同一方的根本違約或是預(yù)期違約，但是兩國(guó)的法律規(guī)定在這個(gè)問(wèn)題上仍是存在較大區(qū)別的，這也必然地影響到了兩國(guó)法律在航次租船合同當(dāng)事人的解約權(quán)這一問(wèn)題上的不同觀點(diǎn)。 第二章主要介紹了航次租船合同雙方當(dāng)事人各自在合同下應(yīng)履行的義務(wù)。作為權(quán)利與義務(wù)的統(tǒng)一體，要了解航次租船合同當(dāng)事人解除合同的權(quán)利，就必須首先明確他們?cè)诤贤聭?yīng)承擔(dān)的義務(wù)。 第三章從上兩章所論述的內(nèi)容出發(fā)，逐一討論了裝貨開(kāi)始前航次租船合同當(dāng)事人的各種違約行為與解約權(quán)之間的關(guān)系，并對(duì)中國(guó)法與英國(guó)法在同一問(wèn)題上的規(guī)定作出了比較�？偟目磥�(lái)，當(dāng)一方當(dāng)事人違反了其在航次租船合同下應(yīng)履行的某一義務(wù)，是否會(huì)賦予對(duì)方當(dāng)事人解除合同的權(quán)利，從大原則上來(lái)看，無(wú)論是中國(guó)法還是英國(guó)法，違約行為后果的嚴(yán)重程度都會(huì)是最重要的考慮因素。但是由于海事法律以及航次租船合同本身的特殊性，情況也并不完全是這樣。 第四章致力于討論一個(gè)比較特殊的法律問(wèn)題，即，在承租人遲延提供或不提供約定的貨物裝船的情況下，出租人如何才能獲得解約權(quán)。中國(guó)法和英國(guó)法下對(duì)這個(gè)問(wèn)題都是適用各自合同法律領(lǐng)域的原則和規(guī)定來(lái)解決。然而，由于中英兩國(guó)合同法律上一些具體規(guī)定的不同，在兩國(guó)法律下分別解決這一問(wèn)題的途徑也有相當(dāng)大的差別。 論裝貨開(kāi)始前航次租船合同當(dāng)事人的解約權(quán)及其相關(guān)問(wèn)題 第五章則是關(guān)于航次租船合同當(dāng)事人約定依據(jù)下的解約權(quán)問(wèn)題。在航次租船合 同領(lǐng)域，使用最普遍也是最重要的約定依據(jù)下的解約權(quán)來(lái)自于合同中的解約條款。 可以說(shuō)，在英國(guó)法下，這完全是個(gè)合同問(wèn)題：而在中國(guó)法下，由于中國(guó)《海商法》 第97條的規(guī)定采納了解約條款的實(shí)際內(nèi)容，因此，中國(guó)法下的這種解約權(quán)也獲得了 法定的依據(jù)。在這一章，本文還討論了與解約條款相關(guān)的一系列問(wèn)題。
[Abstract]:The voyage charter contract is a special legal phenomenon in the field of contract. It constitutes a part of the legal and Customary System of maritime business, which is characteristic and international. It is also influenced by the adjustment of contract law and the principle of freedom of contract. Therefore, it contains many complicated legal problems. The focus of this article is the focus of this article. The settlement right of the parties to the sub charter party is one of them. At the same time, the discussion of this article is mainly focused on this stage because of the characteristics of the voyage charter contract before loading port before loading port under the voyage charter contract. In addition, the similarities and differences between China and the United Kingdom in this field are compared. The former is the domestic law of our country and the latter, which should be said to represent the mainstream view of the world in this field because of all kinds of reasons.
This article can be divided into five parts, forming the five chapter respectively.
The first chapter discusses the basis of the right to release the contract under the British law and the Chinese law. Under the laws of the two countries, the party's basis for the exercise of the right of dissolution can be divided into two types of statutory and agreement. The latter comes from the contract parties' agreement in the contract, while the former comes from the direct provisions of the law. The legal basis of the right is mainly from the fundamental breach of contract or the expected breach of contract, but the legal provisions of the two countries are still very different on this issue, which also inevitably affects the different views of the two countries' law on the right of the parties to the voyage charter party.
The second chapter mainly introduces the obligations of both parties in the voyage charter contract under the contract. As a unity of rights and obligations, it is necessary to understand the rights of the parties to the contract of the voyage charter party to clear the obligations under the contract.
The third chapter, starting from the contents of the previous two chapters, discusses the relationship between the various parties' breach of contract and the right to resolve the contract before the beginning of loading, and compares the provisions of the Chinese law with the British law on the same issue. In general, when one party violates the execution of the charter party under the voyage contract Whether or not a certain obligation will give the party the right to dissolve the contract, from a large principle, whether it is the Chinese law or the British law, the severity of the consequences of the breach will be the most important consideration. However, the situation is not exactly the case because of the particularity of the maritime law and the voyage charter party itself.
The fourth chapter is devoted to the discussion of a special legal question, that is, how can the lessor obtain the right to release the contract when the lessee has delayed or does not provide the agreed shipment. Under the Chinese law and the British law, the problem is solved by the principles and regulations applicable to the respective legal fields of the contract. However, because of the two countries, China and Britain There are also quite different ways to solve this problem separately under the two countries' laws.
On the right of cancellation of the parties involved in voyage charter party before loading and related issues
The fifth chapter deals with the issue of termination right under the agreement of the parties engaged in voyage charter party.
The most common and important agreement in the same field is the termination right under the contract.
It can be said that under the English law, this is completely a contract problem: under the Chinese law, because of China's maritime law,
The ninety-seventh provision adopted the actual content of the rescission clause, so the right to rescission under the Chinese law was also obtained.
In this chapter, we also discuss a series of problems related to the dissolution clause.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：上海海運(yùn)學(xué)院
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2001
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D913

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前3條

1 王晶;航次租船合同中出租人解約條款的研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2011年

2 鮑丙春;航次租船合同解除的比較研究[D];蘇州大學(xué);2006年

3 劉海;航次租船合同的解除問(wèn)題研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2013年

本文編號(hào)：1975960