【作者】 钟开福；

【导师】 张驰；

【作者基本信息】 华东政法大学 ， 法律， 2009， 硕士

【摘要】 2007年新颁布的《中华人民共和国物权法》将应收账款作为权利质押种类之一,丰富了我国权利质押融资的方式,也从法律制度层面满足了企业尤其是中小企业融资的需求。应收账款质押实质是以一种请求权担保另一种请求权的实现,质权的实现最终依赖于第三债务人(即应收账款债务人)的履行能力,这使其带有人保的痕迹。这也是该制度引发各种争议的根本原因。由于这一制度在理论与实践中存在的争议较多,囿于篇幅,本文择其要者进行分析。全文除引言和结语外分为两部分。第一部分为理论层面的界定；第二部分则为实践层面的制度设计。具体而言：第一部分“应收账款质押的界定”包括三个方面的内容：应收账款质押的性质、范围以及其独立价值。首先,文章认为“准质权说”能够较好地解释应收账款质权的物权性与标的(应收账款)的债权性之间的矛盾,因此其性质宜认定为是一种“准质权”；其次,对于应收账款质押的范围,文章认为可用于质押的应收账款不但应具有作为权利质押标的的一般要件,而且还应与证券债权相区别,此外,还对未来应收账款能否用于出质着重进行了论述。至于收费权,则认为其性质应该是一种特许经营权,属于无形资产的范畴,从而不应纳入应收账款质押的范围；最后,文章将应收账款质押与让与担保、债权转让、保理制度进行了比较,指出其具有不能为其他制度所取代的独立价值。第二部分“应收账款质押的运行”分为两个方面的内容：应收账款质押的设定与应收账款质押的实现。前者对应收账款质押设立中涉及的质押协议、移转占有方式及通知第三债务人等三个方面的问题逐一进行了立法之比较分析,认为我国立法在规定“当事人应当订立书面合同,质权自信贷征信机构办理出质登记时设立”的基础上,还应该明确规定“有债权证书的应当交付”以及“未经通知或承诺,不得对抗第三债务人”为妥；后者则主要解决了应收账款质押中涉及到两个债权清偿期不一致的情况下质权如何实现的问题。更多还原

【Abstract】 The new "people’s Republic of China property law" promulgated in 2007 made the pledge of accounts receivable as a type of the right to pledge which will not only enrich our country’way of financing, but also meet the needs of enterprises from the level of legal system, especially small and medium enterprises. The substance of pledge of accounts receivable is based on one right to request to guarantee the realization of another. The realization of the right quality dependents on the discharge capacity of the garnishee (that is, the debtor’s accounts receivable), which Made it the traces of a People’s Insurance. This is the root causes of controversy of the system. As there are many controversies exist in the system in theory and practice, some of them will be selected to analyze in this paper. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, the full text of is divided into two parts:the theoretical definition for one part, and system-level design in practice for another. Specifically speaking:The first part holds three shares:the nature of pledge of accounts receivable, scope and the value of its independent. Firstly, the article hold the view that the nature of pledge of accounts receivable is one of the "quasi-quality right of pledge", for the theory of "quasi-quality right of pledge" could be used to explain the Contradiction of pledge of accounts receivable between its character of property and of claim in subject(accounts receivable). Secondly, for the scope of a pledge of accounts receivable, the article hold views that which account is suitable to be the ledge of accounts receivable not only should have the general elements to be the subject of the right to pledge, but also should be distinguish from debt securities. Whether the future accounts receivable is suitable to be subject of the pledge of accounts receivable is discussed in this paper specifically. As to the right to charge, this article argued that it should not be subject of the pledge of accounts receivable. Thirdly, the Pledge of accounts receivable, Guarantee, Debt Transfer, and Factoring system are compared, pointing out that the system of Pledge of accounts receivable can not be replaced.The second part owns two shares:The set of the pledge of accounts receivable and the realization of. The pledge agreement, ways of the transfer of possession and notification to the garnishee in the setting of pledge of accounts receivable are analyzed legislatively in the former part, and finally come to the conclusion that China’s legislation not only should provide that "the parties shall enter into a written contract; the right quality is established when registration have done in credit agencies ", but also should clear that " claims of certificates should be delivered " and "without notification to or promise of the garnishee, no against is allowed "as well. The issue of how to achieve the right when claim settlement periods of two cases related in the pledge of accounts receivable are inconsistent is mainly settled the latter.更多还原