海运货物留置权若干问题的探讨
|
摘要
海运货物留置权是承运人依据海上货物运输合同或法律规定所具有的对其在运输过程中所合法占有的货物，在货方不支付运费、滞期费以及共同海损分摊等费用时，不予以交付并加以处置，以及从处置所得价款中优先受偿的权利。我国民法、担保法、合同法和海商法均有关于留置权的法律规定，这些法律规定有不尽完善的地方，有些规定也不是很明确，还有一些规定在实践中无法操作，所有这些，都制约了留置权的担保物权功能的实现，增加了权利实现的社会成本，影响了商品流转和交易。因此，笔者认为有必要澄清关于海运货物留置权的某些问题。
本文共分八章。
第一章主要讨论海运货物留置权的概念。从我国现行法律规定出发，揭示了留置权的含义并归纳出海运货物留置权的概念。第二章通过各国留置权立法例的启示，分析了我国《海商法》第87条项下的海运货物留置权的性质，笔者认为其性质分为二部分：承运人为收取运费、共同海损分摊和为货物垫付的必要费用等属于对方合同义务的费用而行使的留置权，是一种物权性的留置权，为法定担保物权；承运人为收取滞期费等属于对方合同责任的费用而扣留货物，是一种债权性留置权，为合同的留置权。第三章探讨了物权性的海运货物留置权的成立条件。笔者认为，满足四个条件，即承运人合法地占有货物、留置的标的物为承运人所运输的货物、债权的发生与该留置物有牵连关系以及承运人的债权已届清偿期，海运货物留置权即告成立。第四章对海运货物留置权所担保的债权项目进行了研究。第五章比较了两种货物留置权行使的方式。船东要正确行使留置的方式，应多方面权衡两种做法的优劣。第六章运用留置权的法理分析了有关海运货物留置权的几个特别问题。一是承运人决定是否接受债务人所提供的担保需要考虑的因素，二是在航次承租人或收货人负责卸货情况下海运货物留置权的问题，三是债权的诉讼实效届满，留置权是否消灭的问题，四是留置物被非法侵夺留置权是否消灭的
I
问题。第七章讨论了责任终止与留置条款的生效要件，共存原则和为装港滞
期费进行留置等问题。第八章对《海商法》第88 条的适用与完善进行了分
析和研究。针对海商法第88条的规定，笔者对其的适用条件“船舶抵达卸
货港的次日起满60 日无人提取货物的”进行了分析和讨论，认为“船舶抵
达”应理解为船舶己到达卸货地点并能够实际开始卸货。对承运人留置权的
实施笔者认为应当通过法院裁定拍卖货物的方式，并应该建立起我国承运人
实施留置权的特别程序。海商法第88条仅规定在卸货港无人提取货物的情
况下，承运人才可行使留置权，缩小了海运货物留置权的适用。笔者建议予
t 以修改，删除“无人提取货物的”限制，改为“无人偿付应当向承运人支付
的费用的”。
本文在参考部分民法学者有关研究成果的基础上，结合司法实践，对我
国的海运货物留置权制度进行思考并提出一点看法，期望能对我国的留置权
制度的完善提供参考性意见。
Lien on Marine Goods is carrier's right not to deliver but to sell the goods legally possessed under the contract of carriage of goods by sea or according to law when the freight, demurrage and contribution in general average etc. are not paid by the cargo party, and to enjoy priority in compensation with the proceeds of sale of the goods. In our country, the provisions as to lien are included in Civil Code, security law, contract law and maritime code, which are subject to improve. Some of the regulations are not specific, others are inexecutable in practice, which restrict the functioning of lien as a real right for security and increase social cost in exercising this right, thus impacting the circulation and trade of commodities. Therefore, the author believes it necessary to clarify some problems about lien on marine goods.
Eight chapters are included in this paper.
Chapter I refers to lien's concept. Based on the current laws of our country, it concludes the meaning of lien as well as lien on marine goods.
Chapter II makes analysis on properties of lien on marine goods under Article 87 of Maritime Code, based on examples of legislation on lien in various countries. The author holds that there are two properties of lien: one is lien exercised by the carrier when the freight, contribution in general average and other necessary charges which are the other party's obligation to be paid to the carrier are not paid. It is a real right lien, which is a legal real right for security. The other is an obligatory right lien, which is a lien contractually agreed. The carrier exercises lien by detaining goods when the other party's obligatory charges like demurrage are not paid.
Chapter III discusses effective conditions of lien on marine goods with real right. The author believes that lien on marine goods becomes effective as long as the following four conditions are met: the carrier legally possesses the goods; the subject matter on lien is the goods transported by the carrier; the debt is associated with the good on lien; liquidation period has expired.
Chapter IV investigates obligatory rights secured by lien on marine goods.
Chapter V compares two methods of exercising lien on goods. It points out that the shipowner shall compare the advantages and
disadvantages between lien on board and lien on shore before determining proper methods of lien.
Chapter VI gives analysis on particular issues about lien on marine goods through lien nomology. The first issue is the two factors generally considered by the carrier in considering whether to accept security provided by the obligor. The second issue is the problem of lien on marine goods when the voyage charterer or the consignee is in charge of discharging the goods. The third issue is whether lien is extinguished with the expiration of litigation period. The fourth issue is whether lien is extinguished if the goods on lien are illegally deprived.
Chapter discusses effective conditions of the cesser and lien clause and coexistence principle, as well as lien for demurrage.
Chapter analyzes and investigates the application and improvement of Article 88 of Maritime Code. As for the applicable condition
of Article 88 "if the goods .... have not been taken delivery of within 60
days from the next day of the ship's arrival at the port of discharge", the author thinks that "ship's arrival" shall be understood as that the ship has arrived at the port of discharge and the goods can actually be discharged. Carrier's lien should be enforced through ruling by the Court to sell the goods by auction. Special procedures should be established for exercising carrier's lien in our country. Application of Article 88 of Maritime Code is limited by exercising lien on goods not taken delivery of at the port of
discharge. The author suggests to replace "if the goods ......... have not
been taken delivery of" with "if the charges to be paid to the carrier have not been paid".
In this T paper, the author raises a few views about the lien system in our country
本文共分八章。
第一章主要讨论海运货物留置权的概念。从我国现行法律规定出发，揭示了留置权的含义并归纳出海运货物留置权的概念。第二章通过各国留置权立法例的启示，分析了我国《海商法》第87条项下的海运货物留置权的性质，笔者认为其性质分为二部分：承运人为收取运费、共同海损分摊和为货物垫付的必要费用等属于对方合同义务的费用而行使的留置权，是一种物权性的留置权，为法定担保物权；承运人为收取滞期费等属于对方合同责任的费用而扣留货物，是一种债权性留置权，为合同的留置权。第三章探讨了物权性的海运货物留置权的成立条件。笔者认为，满足四个条件，即承运人合法地占有货物、留置的标的物为承运人所运输的货物、债权的发生与该留置物有牵连关系以及承运人的债权已届清偿期，海运货物留置权即告成立。第四章对海运货物留置权所担保的债权项目进行了研究。第五章比较了两种货物留置权行使的方式。船东要正确行使留置的方式，应多方面权衡两种做法的优劣。第六章运用留置权的法理分析了有关海运货物留置权的几个特别问题。一是承运人决定是否接受债务人所提供的担保需要考虑的因素，二是在航次承租人或收货人负责卸货情况下海运货物留置权的问题，三是债权的诉讼实效届满，留置权是否消灭的问题，四是留置物被非法侵夺留置权是否消灭的
I
问题。第七章讨论了责任终止与留置条款的生效要件，共存原则和为装港滞
期费进行留置等问题。第八章对《海商法》第88 条的适用与完善进行了分
析和研究。针对海商法第88条的规定，笔者对其的适用条件“船舶抵达卸
货港的次日起满60 日无人提取货物的”进行了分析和讨论，认为“船舶抵
达”应理解为船舶己到达卸货地点并能够实际开始卸货。对承运人留置权的
实施笔者认为应当通过法院裁定拍卖货物的方式，并应该建立起我国承运人
实施留置权的特别程序。海商法第88条仅规定在卸货港无人提取货物的情
况下，承运人才可行使留置权，缩小了海运货物留置权的适用。笔者建议予
t 以修改，删除“无人提取货物的”限制，改为“无人偿付应当向承运人支付
的费用的”。
本文在参考部分民法学者有关研究成果的基础上，结合司法实践，对我
国的海运货物留置权制度进行思考并提出一点看法，期望能对我国的留置权
制度的完善提供参考性意见。
Lien on Marine Goods is carrier's right not to deliver but to sell the goods legally possessed under the contract of carriage of goods by sea or according to law when the freight, demurrage and contribution in general average etc. are not paid by the cargo party, and to enjoy priority in compensation with the proceeds of sale of the goods. In our country, the provisions as to lien are included in Civil Code, security law, contract law and maritime code, which are subject to improve. Some of the regulations are not specific, others are inexecutable in practice, which restrict the functioning of lien as a real right for security and increase social cost in exercising this right, thus impacting the circulation and trade of commodities. Therefore, the author believes it necessary to clarify some problems about lien on marine goods.
Eight chapters are included in this paper.
Chapter I refers to lien's concept. Based on the current laws of our country, it concludes the meaning of lien as well as lien on marine goods.
Chapter II makes analysis on properties of lien on marine goods under Article 87 of Maritime Code, based on examples of legislation on lien in various countries. The author holds that there are two properties of lien: one is lien exercised by the carrier when the freight, contribution in general average and other necessary charges which are the other party's obligation to be paid to the carrier are not paid. It is a real right lien, which is a legal real right for security. The other is an obligatory right lien, which is a lien contractually agreed. The carrier exercises lien by detaining goods when the other party's obligatory charges like demurrage are not paid.
Chapter III discusses effective conditions of lien on marine goods with real right. The author believes that lien on marine goods becomes effective as long as the following four conditions are met: the carrier legally possesses the goods; the subject matter on lien is the goods transported by the carrier; the debt is associated with the good on lien; liquidation period has expired.
Chapter IV investigates obligatory rights secured by lien on marine goods.
Chapter V compares two methods of exercising lien on goods. It points out that the shipowner shall compare the advantages and
disadvantages between lien on board and lien on shore before determining proper methods of lien.
Chapter VI gives analysis on particular issues about lien on marine goods through lien nomology. The first issue is the two factors generally considered by the carrier in considering whether to accept security provided by the obligor. The second issue is the problem of lien on marine goods when the voyage charterer or the consignee is in charge of discharging the goods. The third issue is whether lien is extinguished with the expiration of litigation period. The fourth issue is whether lien is extinguished if the goods on lien are illegally deprived.
Chapter discusses effective conditions of the cesser and lien clause and coexistence principle, as well as lien for demurrage.
Chapter analyzes and investigates the application and improvement of Article 88 of Maritime Code. As for the applicable condition
of Article 88 "if the goods .... have not been taken delivery of within 60
days from the next day of the ship's arrival at the port of discharge", the author thinks that "ship's arrival" shall be understood as that the ship has arrived at the port of discharge and the goods can actually be discharged. Carrier's lien should be enforced through ruling by the Court to sell the goods by auction. Special procedures should be established for exercising carrier's lien in our country. Application of Article 88 of Maritime Code is limited by exercising lien on goods not taken delivery of at the port of
discharge. The author suggests to replace "if the goods ......... have not
been taken delivery of" with "if the charges to be paid to the carrier have not been paid".
In this T paper, the author raises a few views about the lien system in our country
引文
1．邹海林．留置权基本问题研究．法学研究．1991，2
2．王利明．中国物权法草案建议稿及说明．中国法制出版社．2001
3．李明发．是债的担保，还是合同之债的担保．见：民商法纵论．中国法制出版社，2000
4．佟柔．中国民法．法律出版社，1991
5．史尚宽．物权法论．台湾荣泰印务馆，1979
6．稻本洋之助．民法(2)物权．青林书院新社，1983
7．梁慧星．中国物权法研究．法律出版社，1998
8．王泽鉴．台湾现行民法与市场经济．见：民法学说与判例研究第7卷．中国政法大学出版社，1997
9．傅郁林．大陆法系海上货物留置权制度的功能比较分析．见：金正佳，编．中国海事审判年刊．人民交通出版社，1999
10．杨立新．留置权的适用条件．见：王利明，编．中国民法案例与学理研究．法律出版社．1998
11．郭明瑞，杨立新．担保法新论．吉林人民出版社，1996
12．杨与龄．民法物权．五南图书出版公司，1981
13．王利明，崔建远．合同法新论·总则．中国政法大学出版社，1996
14．施文，伍载阳．论海运货物留置权．见：海口海事法院，编．海事审判论文案例集．海南出版社，17
18．李国光．合同法释解与适用．新华出版社，1999
19．许俊强．合同法对海上货物运输合同的规范．见：海商法研究．法律出版社．2001
20．谢在全．民法物权论(下册)．1991
21．周诚友．留置权在海事审判中的运用．见：金正佳，编．《海事审判》精选本
22．江平．中华人民共和国合同法精解．中国政法大学出版社，1999
23．傅廷中．漫议承租人责任终止条款．中国远洋航务公告，1999，7
24．叶颂韶．再论承运人的货物留置权．见：中国海商法年刊．大连海运学院出版社，1997
25．陈晶营，张军伟．试论承运人留置权之特殊性．见：金正佳，编．中国海事审判年刊．人民交通出版社，2000
26．杨良宜．程租和约．大连海事大学出版社，1998
27．尹东年，郭瑜．海上货物运输法．人民法院出版社
28．梁慧星，陈华彬．物权法．法律出版社，1997
29．郭明瑞．担保法原理与实务．中国方正出版社，1995
30．李国光，奚晓明，金剑峰等．《关于适用<中华人民共和国担保法>若干问题的解释》理解与适用．吉林人民出版社，2000
31．孙鹏，肖厚国．担保法律制度研究．法律出版社，1998
32．王美娟．留置权初探．中国法学．1992，1
33．杨良宜，姚洪秀．航次租船合同与租船实务．百家出版社，1993
34. Er Hardy Ivamy. Carriage of Goods by Sea. London Butterworthy, 1985
35. Michael Wilford. Time Charter. Lloyd's of London Press Ltd, 1989
36. Thomes Eward Scrutton. Charterparties and B/L
37. Lloyd's Report
38. Scrutton on Charter-Parties
39. www. internationallawoffice.com
2．王利明．中国物权法草案建议稿及说明．中国法制出版社．2001
3．李明发．是债的担保，还是合同之债的担保．见：民商法纵论．中国法制出版社，2000
4．佟柔．中国民法．法律出版社，1991
5．史尚宽．物权法论．台湾荣泰印务馆，1979
6．稻本洋之助．民法(2)物权．青林书院新社，1983
7．梁慧星．中国物权法研究．法律出版社，1998
8．王泽鉴．台湾现行民法与市场经济．见：民法学说与判例研究第7卷．中国政法大学出版社，1997
9．傅郁林．大陆法系海上货物留置权制度的功能比较分析．见：金正佳，编．中国海事审判年刊．人民交通出版社，1999
10．杨立新．留置权的适用条件．见：王利明，编．中国民法案例与学理研究．法律出版社．1998
11．郭明瑞，杨立新．担保法新论．吉林人民出版社，1996
12．杨与龄．民法物权．五南图书出版公司，1981
13．王利明，崔建远．合同法新论·总则．中国政法大学出版社，1996
14．施文，伍载阳．论海运货物留置权．见：海口海事法院，编．海事审判论文案例集．海南出版社，17
18．李国光．合同法释解与适用．新华出版社，1999
19．许俊强．合同法对海上货物运输合同的规范．见：海商法研究．法律出版社．2001
20．谢在全．民法物权论(下册)．1991
21．周诚友．留置权在海事审判中的运用．见：金正佳，编．《海事审判》精选本
22．江平．中华人民共和国合同法精解．中国政法大学出版社，1999
23．傅廷中．漫议承租人责任终止条款．中国远洋航务公告，1999，7
24．叶颂韶．再论承运人的货物留置权．见：中国海商法年刊．大连海运学院出版社，1997
25．陈晶营，张军伟．试论承运人留置权之特殊性．见：金正佳，编．中国海事审判年刊．人民交通出版社，2000
26．杨良宜．程租和约．大连海事大学出版社，1998
27．尹东年，郭瑜．海上货物运输法．人民法院出版社
28．梁慧星，陈华彬．物权法．法律出版社，1997
29．郭明瑞．担保法原理与实务．中国方正出版社，1995
30．李国光，奚晓明，金剑峰等．《关于适用<中华人民共和国担保法>若干问题的解释》理解与适用．吉林人民出版社，2000
31．孙鹏，肖厚国．担保法律制度研究．法律出版社，1998
32．王美娟．留置权初探．中国法学．1992，1
33．杨良宜，姚洪秀．航次租船合同与租船实务．百家出版社，1993
34. Er Hardy Ivamy. Carriage of Goods by Sea. London Butterworthy, 1985
35. Michael Wilford. Time Charter. Lloyd's of London Press Ltd, 1989
36. Thomes Eward Scrutton. Charterparties and B/L
37. Lloyd's Report
38. Scrutton on Charter-Parties
39. www. internationallawoffice.com