本文選題：船舶優(yōu)先權(quán) + 優(yōu)先性　； 參考：《東南大學(xué)》2015年碩士論文

【摘要】：船舶優(yōu)先權(quán)與海事賠償責(zé)任限制都是長(zhǎng)久存在于海商法的特殊的制度。它們同樣有著古老的起源,都為保證航海業(yè)的穩(wěn)定、健康發(fā)展做出了重要貢獻(xiàn)。船舶優(yōu)先權(quán)制度設(shè)立的初衷在于保護(hù)特定債權(quán)人的權(quán)益,而海事賠償責(zé)任限制制度設(shè)立的目的卻是保護(hù)船舶有所人的利益,可以說,船舶優(yōu)先權(quán)保護(hù)了債權(quán)人的利益,而海事賠償責(zé)任限制卻保護(hù)了債務(wù)人的利益；并且,在兩項(xiàng)制度的行使程序上,由于海事賠償責(zé)任限制基金的設(shè)立而導(dǎo)致船舶優(yōu)先權(quán)程序的終止,對(duì)船舶優(yōu)先權(quán)人行使權(quán)利造成影響,這樣的制度設(shè)計(jì)必然導(dǎo)致了兩種制度在某些方面產(chǎn)生一定的沖突。但深入分析兩項(xiàng)制度,也不難發(fā)現(xiàn),沖突并非是無法協(xié)調(diào)的,而兩項(xiàng)特殊的海商法制度也是相互協(xié)調(diào)與平衡的。本文第一部分將介紹船舶優(yōu)先權(quán)制度,在這一部分,本文將著重分析船舶優(yōu)先權(quán)的優(yōu)先性,以優(yōu)先性為脈絡(luò),介紹船舶優(yōu)先權(quán)的項(xiàng)目及受償順序。船舶優(yōu)先權(quán)的受償順序是一個(gè)較為復(fù)雜的問題,本文選擇以圖表結(jié)合文字說明的方式,將船舶優(yōu)先權(quán)的順序更為清楚、簡(jiǎn)潔地表述出來。本文的第二部分將介紹分析海事賠償責(zé)任限制制度。這一部分,文章還將著重分析責(zé)任限制制度中一個(gè)重要的因素,即,責(zé)任限制基金。本文對(duì)責(zé)任限制基金的設(shè)立效果將做著重分析,以鋪底第三部分所闡述之船舶優(yōu)先權(quán)與責(zé)任限制的沖突表現(xiàn)。本文第三部分將就船舶優(yōu)先權(quán)與海事賠償責(zé)任限制的沖突展開分析。從兩者保護(hù)對(duì)象的不同、請(qǐng)求項(xiàng)目的競(jìng)合、船舶優(yōu)先權(quán)與非限制性債權(quán)的交叉、兩者權(quán)利行使方式的差異這幾點(diǎn)進(jìn)行論述分析。本文最后一個(gè)部分將探討船舶優(yōu)先權(quán)與海事賠償責(zé)任限制之間沖突可行的解決方法。通過橫向及縱向分析明確兩者沖突的范圍,再探討責(zé)任限制啟動(dòng)的必要性,最后,從國際公約的態(tài)度、對(duì)責(zé)任限制的制度角度說明兩種制度是否可以共存,并在文章最后提出化解兩種制度沖突的可行之方法。
[Abstract]:Maritime lien and limitation of maritime liability are the special systems of maritime law for a long time. They also have an ancient origin and have made important contributions to ensuring the stability and healthy development of the shipping industry. The original intention of the maritime lien system is to protect the rights and interests of the specific creditors, but the purpose of the maritime liability limitation system is to protect the interests of the people of the ship. It can be said that the maritime lien protects the interests of the creditors. However, the limitation of liability for maritime claims protects the interests of the debtor, and, in the procedure of exercising the two systems, the establishment of the limitation fund for maritime liability leads to the termination of the maritime lien procedure. This system design inevitably leads to some conflicts between the two systems in some aspects. However, it is not difficult to find that the conflict is not impossible to coordinate, and the two special maritime law systems are also coordinated and balanced. The first part of this paper will introduce the maritime lien system. In this part, this paper will focus on the analysis of the priority of maritime liens, take priority as the context, introduce the items of maritime liens and the order of compensation. The compensation order of maritime liens is a complicated problem. In this paper, the order of maritime liens is expressed more clearly and succinctly. The second part of this paper will introduce and analyze the limitation system of liability for maritime claims. In this part, the article will focus on an important factor in liability limitation system, that is, liability limitation fund. This paper will focus on the analysis of the effect of the establishment of liability limitation fund in order to explain the conflict between maritime liens and liability limitation in the third part. The third part will analyze the conflict between maritime lien and limitation of maritime liability. This paper discusses and analyzes the differences of the object of protection between the two, the competing of claim items, the crossing of maritime liens and unrestricted claims, and the differences in the way of exercising their rights. In the last part of this paper, a feasible solution to the conflict between maritime lien and limitation of maritime liability is discussed. Through horizontal and vertical analysis to clarify the scope of the conflict between the two, and then to explore the necessity of starting liability limitation. Finally, from the attitude of international conventions, the paper explains whether the two systems can coexist from the perspective of the system of liability limitation. At the end of the article, the author puts forward the feasible methods to resolve the conflict between the two systems.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：東南大學(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 王煒;墊款人取得船舶優(yōu)先權(quán)的相關(guān)問題分析[J];水運(yùn)管理;2004年06期

2 李亮;船舶優(yōu)先權(quán)實(shí)行論[J];廣西社會(huì)科學(xué);2005年07期

3 孫瑛;宋建俠;;船舶優(yōu)先權(quán)客體范圍比較與研究[J];中國水運(yùn)(學(xué)術(shù)版);2006年08期

4 黃展健;徐剛;;論船舶優(yōu)先權(quán)的的法律性質(zhì)[J];現(xiàn)代商業(yè);2007年12期

5 孫瑛;孫瑋;;船舶優(yōu)先權(quán)項(xiàng)目比較研究[J];時(shí)代金融;2007年05期

6 高峰;;船舶留置權(quán)與船舶優(yōu)先權(quán)順位之思考[J];黑龍江省政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2008年03期

7 許芳;;淺談船舶優(yōu)先權(quán)[J];中國水運(yùn)(下半月);2008年08期

8 劉sョ，

本文編號(hào)：2041030