【作者】 郭起莲；

【导师】 殷洁；

【作者基本信息】 江西财经大学 ， 经济法学， 2006， 硕士

【摘要】 银行危机是一种古老的经济现象，一部银行发展史几乎就是一部银行危机史。随着金融全球化的急剧扩张和金融创新及信息技术的突飞猛进，商业银行运行的复杂性和不确定性正在迅速增加。商业银行是经营风险的企业，其风险一旦累积到一定量并被公开则金融风险具有强烈的传导性。因此，不论是在允许商业银行破产的国家还是不允许商业银行破产的国家，在处理问题商业银行的起步阶段，都倾向于通过接管这种拯救方式来处理问题商业银行，帮助其渡过难关，保持金融稳定。 接管是一种介于救助和重组之间的对有问题商业银行的处置措施，是金融监管部门处置有问题商业银行的一种方法。本文认为在我国，接管是指当商业银行在业务经营过程中已经或者可能发生信用危机时，为维护存款人的利益，国务院银行业监督管理机构依照法定程序接受并且组织行使该商业银行的经营管理权力，帮助该商业银行恢复其自主经营能力的弥补性、援助性救济措施。 接管的目的是对被接管的商业银行采取必要措施，以保护存款人的利益，恢复商业银行的正常经营能力。被接管的商业银行的债权债务关系不因接管而变化。接管是手段而不是目的。通过接管，来挽救困境银行和保护存款人；接管不是目的，银行破产是为了保持金融业的有效竞争，而这将为整个经济生活和广大存款人带来“物美价廉”的金融服务。接管的价值便在于此。 纵观世界各国银行接管的立法模式，在有些国家，银行依据银行法或者破产法、或同时适用二者的规定实施司法型接管程序，如英国、法国、德国；在其他一些国家，银行则只能依据银行法进行监管型接管程序，如意大利、挪威、美国等。目前，我国商业银行接管法律制度适用银行法而不是破产法。 接管条件是整个接管制度的核心问题。很多国家或地区的立法都重视对商业银行接管条件的规定。不同国家或地区对商业银行在发生何种情形下可能被接管会有不同的规定。从立法例角度分析，主要有两种方式：概括主义和列举主义。我国法律对于商业银行接管的条件是概括主义而非列举主义。但与概括主义立法例不同的是，我国对接管条件的立法表述核心是落在“信用危机”，而不是“不能清偿债务”。笔者认为我国对商业银行接管条件的规定应该采用列举主义和概括主义并举的立法例，尽可能涵盖判断商业银行健康与否的所有重要因素，避免模糊表述。 接管人即接管组织，是在危机商业银行开始破产清算之前，由监管机构及其选任的合格人员接管危机商业银行财产，以保证商业银行的正常运行，维护债权更多还原

【Abstract】 Bank risk is an old economic phenomenon, the development history of a bank is almost the crisis history of the bank. With the rapid development of information and finance renovation and the sharp expansion of finance globalization, the operation of commercial bank is becoming more and more complex and uncertain. Banks are enterprises running risks, once financial risk accumulates to a certain degree and is known, finance risk has strong trend to spread. Therefore, at the first stage to deal with the commercial banks in trouble, both the countries allowing bankruptcy of commercial and those holding opposite views, are inclined to resort to take-over to help them and keep finance stable.Take-over is a measure between relief and reconstruction, a way financial supervision department deals with commercial banks in trouble. This thesis holds that in our country, take-over is a remedy and relief measure that when commercial banks is in credit crisis or is going to be in credit crisis, bank supervision organization of the State Council accepts and exercises the management right to help commercial banks to recover their management ability to protect the interest of depositors.The purpose of take-over is to take necessary measures on the banks took-over to protect the interest of depositors and to recover the management ability of commercial banks. The credits and obligations of the banks took-over will not change for take-over. Take-over is a method, not target. Through take-over, the banks in trouble are to be rescued and the depositors are to be protected; take-over is not the target, the bankruptcy of banks is to protect effective competition of finance line, thus to provide favorable finance service to depositors and the whole economic life. That is the value of take-over.Of the legislation style of bank take-over of different countries, some countries take the judicial take-over procedure in accordance to bank law or bankruptcy law or both, such as England, France, Germany; while in some other countries, banks can only take supervision take-over procedure in accordance to bank law, such as Italy, Norway, America etc. At present, the take-over law system of commercial bank of our country is bank law, not bankruptcy law.Take-over conditions are the keys of the whole take-over system. Many countries and areas lay stress on the conditions of take-over when legislation. Different countries更多还原