【作者】 栾珂；

【导师】 赵鹿军；

【作者基本信息】 大连海事大学 ， 国际法， 2008， 硕士

【摘要】 在国际贸易领域中,提单与票据各司其职,分别发挥着替代货物交付和替代货币给付的作用。两者都是将无形的财产性权利记载于证券纸面之上,而成为一个特殊的“物”,通过证券这个“物”的占有变动来实现“物”所表彰的权利转移。这种“权利证券化”的设计,最终目的是简化了流通程序,促进了交易的发展。提单、票据经济性功能得以发挥的本源在于其证券性的法律性质,这使得提单、票据与证券在法律性质上必然存在若干相通、相似之处。然而与票据之法律体系的相对成熟不同,立法层面,我国提单法律制度尚未形成独立而系统的专门法律;理论层面,对提单作为有价证券的证券法律特征的某些法律观点有很大争议,从而导致了司法实践中,某些法律观点以及判断是非和责任的标准尚不统一。因此,笔者拟从证券角度对提单与票据进行比较研究。首先,笔者肯定了提单功能阶段论说。并以此思路,分析提单作为一种广义的有价证券,既有债权证券的性质,又有物权证券的性质。进而,将提单与票据这种典型的有价证券相比较。得出,由于提单是一种特殊的有价证券,其债权证券性质具有设权性、文义性、无因性,其物权证券性质则不具有这些特征,总体上看,提单之证券特征为不严格的要式性、提示性和缴回性。最后,有价证券追求的就是流通。然而提单基于其复杂的证券性质,与票据之流通性相比,尚有差距。通过将提单与票据进行比较研究,笔者认为,票据法律制度中的大原则与大方向与提单法律制度是一致的,票据法律制度中的许多规则对提单法律制度的系统化均具有有益的借鉴意义,而且对提单的司法实践亦有一定的指导意义。更多还原

【Abstract】 Bill of lading and commercial instruments perform their respective duties in the field of trade and each develops their functions of substituting the delivery of goods and the payment of money. They both record the immaterial possession on the bond paper and turn into a special ’substance’.It is easy to transfer rights only through possession assignment, which makes the circulating procedure become simple and promotes the developing of bargaining. The economic functions of bill of lading and commercial instruments are based on their securities legal nature, so they have something in common in terms of legal nature. In our country, the legal system with respect to commercial instruments is comparatively mature, whereas the legal system in respect of bill of lading has not formed a specialized, dependent and systematic law. In judicial practice, some legal opinions together with the disaccord of the standard of judgment of lightness and wrongness and liabilities have affected the international trade and transportation services of this country. In this article, the legal nature of bill of lading and negotiable instruments is compared and investigated from the perspective of negotiable securities.Firstly, the author affirms the stage theory of the functions of bill lading and analyzes that bill of lading has both the characteristics of debt security and the equity security in the broad sense.Furthermore, the author compares bill of lading with commercial instrument which is the typical kind of securities and draws the following conclusion: for the reason of the speciality of securities, the characteristics of debt security of bill of lading include konstitutiv、literary and non-reason. On the other side, equity security doesn’t have such characteristics. As a whole, the characteristics of bill of lading as a kind of securities are undemandingly requisite in form, suggestive and return.Lastly, it is circulation that the securities pursue. However, based on the speciality of securities, bill of lading is different with the circulation of the securities. With the comparative study of the bill of lading and commercial instrument, the author thinks that the general principle and direction between the bill of lading and commercial instrument are consilient and many rules in the legal system of commercial instrument have beneficial use for reference of the systemization of the legal system of the commercial instrument and instructive significance to the judicatory practice of bill of lading.更多还原