论文部分内容阅读
当今世界,贸易发达,世界范围内的商品交换市场十分繁荣,票据自然亦在国际间流通,这进而要求不同国家的票据法必须尽可能地统一起来。本文在分析了日内瓦《汇票本票统一法公约》和日内瓦《支票统一法公约》(以下简称《日内瓦统一法》)的形成、内涵及其与联合国《国际汇票与本票公约》(以下简称《联合国票据法》)的区别之后,就《中华人民共和国票据法》(以下简称《中国票据法》)与国际票据制度的衔接与背离进行了较为全面的研究,探讨了中国票据立法走向真正现代化的途径。本文认为,《日内瓦统一法》代表了大陆国家票据法制,立法较为严谨,而《联合国票据法》则是对《日内瓦统一法》和英美票据法的协调,条文较为灵活。虽然《联合国票据法》是国际票据立法的最新产物,但《日内瓦统一法》才是真正的国际统一票据制度。《中国票据法》采取三票合一的形式,在票据概念、票据行为、票据权利和涉外票据的法律适用等方面参考和借鉴了国际通行的制度。但与国际票据制度相比,我国票据立法尚存在立法条文过简、行为规则过严、调整范围过窄等不足之处,有必要追随市场经济的发展,进一步深入研究西方国家票据法和统一的票据制度,尽快实现中国票据立法的真正现代化。
In today’s world, trade is booming. The world-wide commodity exchange market is very prosperous, and bills are naturally circulated internationally. This in turn requires that the instruments of law in different countries must be unified as much as possible. This article analyzes the formation and content of the “Uniform Law of Negotiable Instruments of Exchange Promissory Note” in Geneva and the Geneva Convention on Uniform Law of Checks (hereinafter referred to as the “Uniform Law of the People’s Republic of China”), and its relationship with the UN “Conventions on International Draft and Promissory Notes” (hereinafter referred to as “ UN Bill Law ”), a more comprehensive study was carried out on the connection and departure of the“ Negotiable Instruments Law of the People’s Republic of China ”(hereinafter referred to as the“ China Negotiable Instruments Law ”) and the international instrument system. way. This article argues that the Geneva Reunification Law represents the legal system of bills in mainland China and the legislation is more rigorous. The United Nations Bill Act, on the other hand, is the coordination of the Geneva Reunification Law and the Anglo-American negotiable instruments law with more flexible provisions. Although the United Nations Bill Act is the latest product of international bill legislation, the Geneva Reunification Act is the only system of internationally negotiable instruments. The China Negotiable Instruments Law adopts the form of three-in-one, which makes reference to and draws on the internationally accepted system in terms of the concepts of negotiable instruments, the behavior of negotiable instruments, the rights of negotiable instruments and the legal application of negotiable instruments involving foreign currencies. However, compared with the international paper bill system, there are still some shortcomings such as the simplification of the legislative provisions, the overly strict rules of conduct and the narrow scope of adjustment in China’s paper legislation. It is necessary to follow the development of the market economy and further study the paper law and the unification of the western countries Paper system, as soon as possible to achieve the real modernization of China’s bill legislation.