我国票据时效问题研究  

On the Prescription of Chinese Negotiable Instrument

作　　者：侯万龙[1] 高景民[2] 

机构地区：[1]廊坊师范学院社会发展学院,河北廊坊065000 [2]内蒙古工业大学人文与社会科学学院,内蒙古呼和浩特010051

出　　处：《廊坊师范学院学报》2007年第4期75-77,共3页Journal of Langfang Teachers College

基　　金：廊坊师范学院科学研究项目(LSSQZ200407)

摘　　要：国际贸易的不断发展使得票据的使用范围超出了一国的地域,成为国际贸易中的信用工具和结算工具,因此,各国票据法对票据制度的规定应该趋于同一。然而对比我国票据法与国际上普遍适用的日内瓦统一票据法,不难发现二者关于票据时效的规定存在多处区别,如时效性质、时效期间、追索权时效的起算点等规定均不同,通过对这些差异进行分析,便会发现我国票据法关于票据时效的规定还有待进一步完善。With the development of international trade, negotiable instrument has gone beyond the boundary of a country and become an international instrument of financial settlement. Therefore, every country＇s system of negotiable instrument should be in accord with each other＇s. However, comparing the Chinese law of negotiable instrument with the internationally popular law of negotiable instrument made in Geneva, we can discern many differences, such as the character of the prescription, the length of the prescription, the beginning time of the reclaiming. These differences help us know that the Chinese law of negotiable instrument should been perfected as regards the prescription.

关 键 词：票据时效 时效性质 追索权 起算点 

分 类 号：D922.287[政治法律—经济法学]