论文部分内容阅读
我国《海商法》没有规定承运人的无单放货责任性质,最高人民法院出台的《无单交货规定》赋予提单持有人可以向承运人提起违约之诉或侵权之诉的自由择诉权。本文认为,提单持有人的自由择诉权应当有所限定以平衡其与承运人的利益关系,承运人无单放货是违约行为,提单持有人应提起违约之诉;在提单持有人同时为提单项下货物所有权人的情况下,承运人无单放货导致违约责任与侵权责任的竞合,提单持有人可以自由择诉。本文将从提单性质引入,论证无单放货的法律性质以及承运人法律责任性质。
China’s “Maritime Law” does not provide for the carrier’s nature of delivery of goods without a single-delivery, the Supreme People’s Court promulgated the “no-order delivery,” gives the holder of the bill of lading can be breach of contract carrier complaint or infringement complaint of freedom of choice . This paper argues that the holder of the bill of lading free choice of right of complaint should be limited in order to balance the interests of the carrier with the carrier without the bill of lading is a breach of contract, the holder of the bill of lading should be the breach of the complaint; the holder of the bill of lading In the meantime, under the condition that the owner of the goods under the bill of lading is under the bill of lading, if the carrier releases the goods without the delivery of the draft, the competing contractual liability and tort liability will be breached, and the holder of the bill of lading may freely choose the suit. This article will be introduced from the nature of bills of lading, to demonstrate the legal nature of non-delivery of goods and the carrier’s legal liability nature.