【摘要】： 對于提單與貨物所有權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)移的關(guān)系，應(yīng)把所有權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)移的一般理論與提單的法律制度有機(jī)結(jié)合起來進(jìn)行分析。而且由于各國的法律制度存在差別，對于這一問題，應(yīng)具體分析，不可一概而論。單純從海商法或民法的角度來討論這一問題，必將由于方法論上的缺陷，而導(dǎo)致結(jié)論的片面性。 提單對貨物所有權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)移的影響，在英美法系與大陸法系各不相同。即使在各個(gè)法系內(nèi)部，也存在較大的國別差異�？傮w來說，在英國，通�？赏ㄟ^提單推測當(dāng)事人轉(zhuǎn)移所有權(quán)的意圖。在美國，提單對于分析貨物的無條件劃撥具有一定作用，但對提單的處分方式只影響貨物的擔(dān)保權(quán)益，而不影響貨物所有權(quán)的轉(zhuǎn)移。在法國，提單對貨物所有權(quán)的轉(zhuǎn)移基本上沒有影響。在以德國為代表的國家，提單的交付一般與貨物所有權(quán)的轉(zhuǎn)移同步。我國的情形與德國相似。 在國際貿(mào)易結(jié)算中，銀行占有提單享有的只是擔(dān)保權(quán)益，而不取得貨物的所有權(quán)。但銀行占有提單時(shí)，，貨物的所有權(quán)屬于賣方還是買方，要根據(jù)結(jié)算方式與具體情況進(jìn)行判斷。 通過電子提單轉(zhuǎn)移貨物的所有權(quán)首先面臨電子商務(wù)所產(chǎn)生的一般法律問題，其次是電子提單能否完全實(shí)現(xiàn)紙面提單的功能這一特殊法律問題。目前，國際上在這方面已有一定的法律和實(shí)踐，但問題的解決是一個(gè)逐步的過程。 我國應(yīng)對提單交付的法律效果做出明確的法律規(guī)定，以利于對國際貿(mào)易提供確定的法律指引，并與海商法相互照應(yīng)。同時(shí)，我國應(yīng)把握時(shí)機(jī)，對電子提單問題進(jìn)行立法，以適應(yīng)和促進(jìn)我國對外貿(mào)易的發(fā)展。
[Abstract]:As to the relationship between bill of lading and transfer of ownership of goods, the general theory of transfer of ownership should be combined with the legal system of bill of lading. Moreover, because of the differences in the legal systems of various countries, this problem should be analyzed concretely and not generalizably. Simply discussing this problem from the point of view of maritime law or civil law is bound to lead to one-sidedness of conclusion due to methodological defects. The influence of bill of lading on the transfer of title of goods is different in common law system and civil law system. Even within the various legal systems, there are large differences between countries. Generally speaking, in the United Kingdom, the intention of the parties to transfer title can usually be inferred from bills of lading. In the United States, bills of lading play a certain role in analyzing the unconditional transfer of goods, but the disposition of bills of lading only affects the security interests of the goods, not the transfer of ownership of the goods. In France, bills of lading have little effect on the transfer of title to the goods. In Germany, the delivery of bills of lading is generally synchronized with the transfer of title to the goods. The situation in our country is similar to that in Germany. In international trade settlement, the bank has only the security interest in the bill of lading, but not the ownership of the goods. But when the bank has the bill of lading, the ownership of the goods belongs to the seller or the buyer. The transfer of the ownership of goods through electronic bills of lading first faces the general legal problems arising from electronic commerce, followed by the special legal question of whether electronic bills of lading can fully realize the functions of paper bills of lading. At present, there are some laws and practices in this field, but the solution of the problem is a gradual process. China should make clear legal provisions on the legal effect of bill of lading delivery in order to provide definite legal guidance for international trade and to look after each other with maritime law. At the same time, China should seize the opportunity to legislate the electronic bill of lading in order to adapt and promote the development of China's foreign trade.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：蘇州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2003
【分類號(hào)】：D996

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 董越;國際貨物貿(mào)易中的貨物所有權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)移制度研究[D];哈爾濱工程大學(xué);2012年

本文編號(hào)：2324026