本文選題：鹿特丹規(guī)則 + 無單放貨　； 參考：《天津財經(jīng)大學》2011年碩士論文

【摘要】：2008年12月聯(lián)合國大會審議通過了《聯(lián)合國全程或部分海上國際貨物運輸合同公約》,簡稱《鹿特丹規(guī)則》�！堵固氐ひ�(guī)則》的出臺旨在取代原有的《海牙規(guī)則》、《維斯比規(guī)則》、《漢堡規(guī)則》成為統(tǒng)一的國際海上貨物運輸法公約,它重新平衡了船貨雙方的利益,考慮到了“門到門”的運輸方式,順應了時代的發(fā)展,并且在其原始簽字國中,包括了美國和法國等發(fā)達國家,總計代表了全球25%以上的交易量�？梢�,《鹿特丹規(guī)則》有著相當大的影響力。 《鹿特丹規(guī)則》有許多創(chuàng)新性規(guī)定,對航貿(mào)兩屆的諸多方面都會產(chǎn)生影響。本文主要研究其對無單放貨風險的影響,尤其是FOB下無單放貨風險的影響。眾所周知,在出口貿(mào)易中,我國是使用FOB術語交易最多的國家,FOB成交量占到相當大的比重。因此,在這樣的背景下,文章從FOB出口商的角度結合《鹿特丹規(guī)則》對無單放貨這一舊問題進行新的研究,著重分析新規(guī)則出臺后無單放貨風險的變化,并相應地提出風險防范措施,使我國廣大出口商尤其是FOB出口商能更清楚地認識到這些風險,從而減少損失。 文章首先對《鹿特丹規(guī)則》進行概述突出其影響力并簡要地闡述了它對無單放貨的影響。接著結合我國出口貿(mào)易中FOB的交易量分析無單放貨的現(xiàn)狀并指出其成因。然后再結合《鹿特丹規(guī)則》中對無單放貨風險有影響的“托運人制度”、“控制權制度”、以及“貨物交付中的無單放貨規(guī)定”這三個方面,通過與無單放貨的一般風險對比,重點分析《鹿特丹規(guī)則》下該風險的變化,得出新規(guī)則下無單放貨風險增大了的基本結論。緊接著文章通過兩則案例來加深分析。最后,在對風險變化分析的基礎上從宏、微觀兩個層面提出了一些對策建議。宏觀方面,應借《鹿特丹規(guī)則》出臺的契機來完善我國《海商法》,同時FOB出口商應增強自我防范意識,學習相關的慣例規(guī)則；微觀方面,出口商不應放棄訂艙和取得提單的權利,要謹慎選擇單證類型,仔細考察賣方及貨代的資信。此外,FOB出口商還要努力成為《鹿特丹規(guī)則》下的“單證托運人”和“控制方”等。
[Abstract]:In December 2008, the United Nations General Assembly considered and adopted the United Nations Convention on contracts for the International Carriage of goods wholly or partly by Sea, or the Rotterdam rules. The Hamburg rules became the uniform Convention on the Law of the International Carriage of goods by Sea, It rebalanced the interests of both parties, considered the "door-to-door" mode of transportation, adapted to the development of the times, and included developed countries such as the United States and France among its original signatories. The total represents more than 25% of the world's trading volume. It can be seen that the Rotterdam rules have a considerable influence. The Rotterdam rules have many innovative provisions, which will have an impact on many aspects of the two sessions of air trade. This paper mainly studies its influence on the risk of non-bill delivery, especially on the risk of non-bill delivery under FOB. As we all know, in the export trade, our country is the country that uses FOB term to trade most, the turnover of FOB accounts for a considerable proportion. Therefore, in this context, this paper makes a new study on the old issue of non-documentary delivery from the perspective of FOB exporters, and focuses on the analysis of the change of risk of non-documentary delivery after the new rules are issued. In order to make our exporters, especially FOB exporters, more aware of these risks and reduce losses, the corresponding risk prevention measures are put forward. In this paper, the influence of Rotterdam rule is summarized and discussed briefly. Then, combining the trading volume of FOB in China's export trade, the paper analyzes the current situation of the delivery of goods without bill and points out the cause of its formation. Then combining the three aspects of "shipper system", "control system" and "delivery of goods without bill of lading" in Rotterdam rules, by comparing them with the general risk of undocumented delivery. The change of the risk under Rotterdam rule is analyzed, and the basic conclusion is drawn that the risk of delivery without bill is increased under the new rule. Then the article through two cases to deepen the analysis. Finally, on the basis of risk change analysis, some countermeasures and suggestions are put forward from macro and micro level. At the macro level, we should take the opportunity of the Rotterdam rules to perfect the Maritime Law of our country. At the same time, FOB exporters should enhance their awareness of self-prevention and learn the relevant customary rules. The exporter should not give up the right of booking and the right to a bill of lading and carefully select the type of document and carefully examine the credit standing of the seller and the forwarder. In addition, FOB exporters also strive to become "documentary shipper" and "controlling party" under the Rotterdam rules.
【學位授予單位】：天津財經(jīng)大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2011
【分類號】：F746

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 劉俊;;試析不同主體情況下無單放貨的法律性質(zhì)[J];北方論叢;2006年06期

2 姚瑩;;《鹿特丹規(guī)則》對承運人“憑單放貨”義務重大變革之反思——交易便利與交易安全的對弈[J];當代法學;2009年06期

3 鄒巋;孟麗梅;;出口海運中承運人無單放貨的應對策略[J];對外經(jīng)貿(mào)實務;2008年08期

4 汪忠華;;《鹿特丹規(guī)則》下托運人義務變化的初探[J];對外經(jīng)貿(mào)實務;2010年02期

5 馬得懿;;FOB條件下賣方風險問題研究——以托運人制度為視角[J];法商研究;2008年04期

6 姚新超;冷柏軍;;《鹿特丹規(guī)則》下貿(mào)易商權利與義務的變化[J];國際貿(mào)易問題;2009年11期

7 劉剛仿;;國際貨物買賣中無單放貨問題的解決路徑探析[J];國際貿(mào)易問題;2010年06期

8 盧小青;;《鹿特丹規(guī)則》規(guī)制無單放貨之新動向[J];世界海運;2010年10期

9 田莎麗;胡志穎;;警惕FOB術語下的無單放貨[J];技術與市場;2006年12期

10 陶然;高廷亮;;無單放貨的形式、成因和風險防范[J];科技創(chuàng)業(yè)月刊;2009年09期

，

本文編號：2114783