【作者】 王辉；

【导师】 陆剑；

【作者基本信息】 中南财经政法大学 ， 法律硕士（非法学）（专业学位）， 2019， 硕士

【摘要】 保理合同是市场主体将其在商事贸易过程中产生的应收账款转让给保理人,从而获得保理人提供的资金融通、坏账担保、管理或催收应收账款等综合性金融服务的合同。在上世纪九十年代,中国银行先后与德美英等国家签订国际保理协议,逐渐开始办理国际保理业务,但是业务范围并不广泛。在2001年我国加入世界贸易组织后,中国银行开始重视保理业务,各家银行逐步推进保理业务的开展。2011年起我国成为全球最大的保理市场,业务量逐年上升,逐渐成为金融市场融资的重要方式之一。近年来我国保理业务不断增长,保理合同纠纷案件频发,但是由于尚未形成统一的、完整的保理法律规则体系,缺乏直接立法或相关司法解释,加之保理纠纷本身的复杂性,导致各地法院在审理保理合同纠纷案件过程中出现裁判依据缺失、法律适用困难的局面。本文共分为三章,首先在绪论部分结合案例提出文章所要研究的司法实践中保理合同纠纷普遍存在的三个问题,即保理合同特殊应收账款效力认定问题、应收账款转让通知问题及保理人追索权行使问题。同时对国内保理的研究情况做出了梳理,并从中提炼出本文所要阐述的观点。第一章,从保理的起源和发展出发,分析了国内外对保理的法律规定并对我国国内保理的定义做出界定。通过比较委托代理说、让与担保说、代位清偿说、债权质押说和债权让与说,债权让与可以较为全面的解释保理的各项职能,因此将国内保理业务的法律性质定性为特殊债权让与更为妥当。第二章,分析了国内保理所存在的法律适用困境及原因。首先,关于保理合同中特殊类型应收账款转让的效力问题,当基础债权出现虚假情况,只要保理人并无通谋意思表示,则不应以此为由认定保理合同无效;承认未来应收账款的可转让性,但为了确保各方主体交易的利益平衡以及市场秩序的稳定,应对其作出适当的限制;债权人所转让的应收账款附有禁止转让条款的,保理合同仍然有效,债务人不得对抗善意的保理人,但可要求债权人承担违约责任。其次,关于债权转让通知的主体和效力问题,在未来立法中应赋予保理人通知的权利,但需要附有相关凭证,通知到达债务人,方对其产生效力,但债务人明知的除外。最后,对于保理人行使追索权所涉及的问题,在不同情形下采用的追索方式有所区别,在债权人未回购所有应收账款之前,保理人在未获得实际清偿的情形下,同时享有对债权人的追索权和对债务人的求偿权,对于一方已经履行的部分,另一方免除相应的责任。第三章,有针对性地提出完善国内保理合同法律适用规则的建议。在立法层面,应出台保理相关法律规定,并对我国现有的应收账款转让制度、债权让与通知制度以及追索权的行使规定进行改善。在司法层面,对当前审理保理纠纷所涉及到的法律规定进行解释,或发布指导性案例以弥补在立法真空期的缺憾。更多还原

【Abstract】 Factoring is a contract whereby the market subjects transfer its accounts receivable come from of commercial transaction to a factor,the factor provide financial services such as financing,protection bad debts,management or collection of receivables.In the ’90s,the Bank of China successively signed international factoring agreements with Germany,the United States,Britain and other countries,and gradually began to handle international factoring business,but the scope of application was not extensive.After China’s entered the World Trade Organization in 2001,Bank of China began to pay attention to factoring,and other banks gradually promoted the development of factoring.Since 2011,China has become the world’s largest factoring market,and its business volume has been increasing with years,gradually becoming one of the important ways of capitalization in the financial market.In recent years,factoring developed rapidly in China,factoring contract disputes happened frequently,but because our country has not yet formed a unified and complete legal rules of factoring,lack of related legislative or judicial interpretation,and the complexity of factoring dispute,leading to District Court lacked legal basis and applicable difficult of the law when hearing factoring contract dispute cases.This thesis is divided into three chapters.First,in the introduction part,puts forward three questions in the factoring disputes,include the confirmation of the validity of special accounts receivable in factoring contracts,the notice of transfer of accounts receivable and the exercise of the factoring right of recourse.At the same time,this thesis combs the research situation of domestic factoring,and extracts the viewpoints to be elaborated in this paper.Chapter one,starting from the origin and development of factoring,analyzes the legal provisions on factoring at home and abroad and defines the domestic factoring in China.By comparing the Principal-agent theory,conveyance surety theory,subrogation liquidation,pledge of obligation theory and the assignment of claims,the assignment of claims can comprehensively explain various functions of factoring,so it is more appropriate to define the legal nature of domestic factoring as special assignment of creditor’s right.Chapter two,analyzes the difficulties and causes of the legal application of domestic factoring.First of all,the effectiveness of the special assignment of creditor’s right in a factoring contract,when the underlying creditor’s rights are false,as long as the factor without knowing it,it should not be considered as invalid.Recognize the transferability of future accounts receivable,but in order to ensure the balance of interests of all parties and the stability of the market order,should make appropriate restrictions.If the receivables transferred by the creditor are accompanied by a clause forbidding the transfer,the factoring contract shall still be valid.The debtor shall not fight against the well-intentioned factor,even if he transfers the creditor ’s rights are not be pledged by appointment between parties.Secondly,with regard to the subject and effectiveness of the notice of assignment of creditor’s rights,the factor shall be endowed with the right of notice in future legislation,but need relevant documents.The notice shall be effective on the debtor unless the debtor knows it.Finally,for the problem of factoring people involved in exercising the right of recourse,adopt different means of recourse in different situations,before the creditor repurchase all accounts receivable and obtain the actual payment,factor have the right of recourse against the creditor and the debtor.One of them has fulfill the obligation,the other one can release from corresponding obligation.Chapter three,puts forward some suggestions to perfect the applicable rules of domestic factoring contract.At the legislative level,relevant laws and regulations on factoring should be issued,and the existing receivables transfer system,creditor’s right transfer notice system and the exercise of right of recourse in China should be improved.At the judicial level,legal provisions related to the current factoring disputes should be interpreted or guiding cases issued to make up for the deficiency in the legislative vacuum.更多还原