【摘要】：提單是國(guó)際海上貨物運(yùn)輸中的重要單證之一，充當(dāng)國(guó)際海上貨物運(yùn)輸合同的證明是它的一項(xiàng)重要功能。作為運(yùn)輸合同的證明，提單不僅證明合同當(dāng)事人之間合同關(guān)系的存在，而且證明合同關(guān)系的內(nèi)容。這種內(nèi)容除提單的正面記載之外，更重要的是提單的背面條款。但是，關(guān)于提單背面條款的效力一直是理論和實(shí)務(wù)爭(zhēng)議多發(fā)的問(wèn)題，其中，，又以仲裁條款、管轄權(quán)條款等不是規(guī)定當(dāng)事人實(shí)體權(quán)利義務(wù)條款的效力問(wèn)題最為典型。涉及到的問(wèn)題有：提單仲裁條款獨(dú)立性問(wèn)題，即主合同無(wú)效或失效，甚至根本不存在時(shí)，提單仲裁條款是否仍然有效；仲裁條款、管轄權(quán)條款的有效要件；提單條款一般是由承運(yùn)人事先印制，未經(jīng)過(guò)當(dāng)事人之間反復(fù)協(xié)商，且在指示提單或空白提單情況下，由于提單發(fā)生轉(zhuǎn)讓，收貨人或提單受讓人不特定，提單管轄權(quán)條款、仲裁條款對(duì)第三人，即收貨人或者提單持有人是否有效；當(dāng)提單轉(zhuǎn)移至第三者收貨人或者提單持有人時(shí)，在承運(yùn)人與提單持有人之間是否也存在一種合意或者意思表示一致，以及租約仲裁條款并入提單的效力。在我國(guó)的司法實(shí)踐中對(duì)這些條款的效力認(rèn)定一直沒(méi)有統(tǒng)一的認(rèn)識(shí)和一致的做法。本文在盡可能多地收集相關(guān)案例的基礎(chǔ)上，結(jié)合訴訟法、仲裁法、國(guó)際私法和海商法的基本理論，對(duì)提單中仲裁條款、管轄權(quán)條款的上述效力問(wèn)題做一個(gè)比較全面深入的研究，以期為我國(guó)海事司法實(shí)踐提供理論參考。
[Abstract]:Bill of lading is one of the important documents in the international carriage of goods by sea. As the proof of the contract of carriage, the bill of lading not only proves the existence of the contract relationship between the parties to the contract, but also proves the content of the contract relationship. In addition to the front side of the bill of lading, more important is the back clause of the bill of lading. However, the validity of the clause on the back of the bill of lading has always been the subject of theoretical and practical disputes. Among them, arbitration clause, jurisdiction clause and so on are not the most typical issues of the validity of the provisions on the substantive rights and obligations of the parties. The issues involved are: the independence of the arbitration clause of bill of lading, that is, whether the arbitration clause of bill of lading is still valid when the main contract is invalid or invalid, the arbitration clause and the effective elements of the jurisdiction clause; The terms of the bill of lading are usually printed by the carrier in advance, without repeated consultation among the parties, and in the case of instructing the bill of lading or the blank bill of lading, because of the transfer of the bill of lading, the consignee or transferee of the bill of lading is not specific. Whether the arbitration clause is valid for the third party, that is, the consignee or the holder of the bill of lading; When the bill of lading is transferred to the third party consignee or the holder of the bill of lading, is there also a kind of agreement or agreement of intention between the carrier and the holder of the bill of lading, and whether the arbitration clause of the lease is incorporated into the bill of lading. In the judicial practice of our country, there has been no unified understanding and consistent practice on the validity of these clauses. On the basis of collecting as many relevant cases as possible and combining the basic theories of procedural law, arbitration law, private international law and maritime law, this paper makes a comprehensive and in-depth study on the above effects of arbitration clause and jurisdiction clause in bill of lading. In order to provide a theoretical reference for our maritime judicial practice.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：大連海事大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2004
【分類號(hào)】：D996.19

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前6條

1 徐毓媛;提單仲裁條款效力研究[D];天津財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué);2010年

2 薛菁華;提單仲裁條款法律效力的問(wèn)題研究[D];華東政法大學(xué);2007年

3 于旭波;論提單仲裁條款的法律效力[D];西南政法大學(xué);2007年

4 張文超;提單管轄權(quán)條款效力問(wèn)題研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2008年

5 徐佳靖;提單管轄權(quán)條款效力問(wèn)題研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2013年

6 惠瑋;提單管轄權(quán)條款效力研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2013年

本文編號(hào)：2359275