票据行为无因性理论的困境及其解决  

The Dilemma of Abstract Principle of Commercial Instruments and Its Solution

作　　者：金锦花[1] JIN Jinhua(School of Law,Changchun University of Science and Technology,Changchun 130022,China)

机构地区：[1]长春理工大学法学院,吉林长春130022

出　　处：《大连理工大学学报（社会科学版）》2018年第4期86-90,共5页Journal of Dalian University of Technology(Social Sciences)

基　　金：吉林省社会科学基金项目:"司法责任制及其配套机制研究--基于吉林省司法体制改革实践的实证考察"(2017JD54)

摘　　要：在我国票据立法中,除有《票据法》第13条等多项体现票据行为无因性原则的规范条文之外,尚存在《票据法》第10条等与无因性规则相背离的条文,这不仅在学界及实务界引起广泛的关注和争论,对司法适用也带来了困惑。当前我国多数学者倡导的"相对无因论",亦无法在其逻辑框架中突破《票据法》第10条导致的立法悖论,获得以保护善意持票人为目的的、合法且逻辑完备的司法论证。文章所主张的票据行为二阶段无因论,不仅能够更加合乎逻辑地贯彻无因性理论的价值取向,亦可突破当前票据立法的规范矛盾,在《票据法》尚未修正之前,能逻辑自洽地适用相关法律规则,实现票据立法的目的。In the legislation of commercial instruments of China,there are still some clauses that go against the tenth clause of the Negotiable Instruments Law,though there are standardized clauses that embody the abstract principle of commercial instruments.This not only draws attention and concerns in the academic and practical field,but also brings confusion in the judicial practice.Even the relative abstract theory advocated by most academics cannot break through the legal paradox caused by the tenth clause in the Negotiable Instruments Law,and a logical,legal and complete judicial demonstration can not be reached to protect the interests of bona fide bearer.The negotiable instrument acts as a two-stage abstract theory proposed in this paper could not only conform to implementing the intention of the abstract-principle,but also break up the current contradictions between different instrument standardizations before the implementation of the Negotiable Instruments Law.Therefore,the statutory rules can be applied logically and appropriately,and thus accomplishing the goals of commercial instruments legislation.

关 键 词：票据 无因性 二阶段说 司法推理 

分 类 号：D913.99[政治法律—民商法学]