票据利益返还请求权的合理性分析——兼论票据利益返还请求权的废除  

Analysis of Validity of the Claim for Reinstitution Interest in Negotiable Instrument——With Additional Discussion on the Abolition of the Claim for Reinstitution Interest in Negotiable Instrument

作　　者：刘江伟[1] 

机构地区：[1]华东政法大学经济法学院,上海200042

出　　处：《河南科技大学学报（社会科学版）》2017年第1期104-109,共6页Journal of Henan University of Science & Technology(Social science)

摘　　要：大陆法系中的一些国家规定了票据利益返还请求权制度,我国《票据法》也紧随其后规定了该制度。从比较法来看,票据利益返还请求权制度是一项法政策的选择,而非体系化产物,不是票据法体系所必需具备的。我国在继受和移植该制度时,规则内容发生了变化。通过对现行制度规范的法律构造和法律效果的分析可知,票据利益返还请求权制度与票据法中的其他制度存在或多或少的冲突,欠缺合理性。因此,未来修订法律时应予以废除,不应该再继续保留此制度。Some countries in civil law system regulate the right of claim for reinstitution interest in negotiable instrument; Negotiable Instruments Law of the People＇s Republic of China also stipulates this right. From the perspective of comparative law,the right of claim for reinstitution interest in negotiable instrument is a choice of law policy,not a product of system,and it is not necessary to the system of the instrument law. The rule has changed in the following and the transplanting of the law in our country. By analyzing the legal structure and legal effect of the current system,we can see that there are conflicts between the right of claim for reinstitution interest in negotiable instrument and other systems in China ＇s Negotiable Instruments Law,and it lacks in validity. Therefore,the system should be abolished rather than preserved in the future revision of the law.

关 键 词：票据利益返还请求权 票据权利 票据 记载事项 

分 类 号：D923.3[政治法律—民商法学]