货运代理转委托中委托人和第三人之间的请求权——以《民法典》第925条、第926条作为请求权基础之反思  

Claims between principal and third party in sub-mandate of freight forwarding--a critical analysis on taking articles 925 and 926 of the Civil Code as legal basis

作　　者：夏敏 XIA Min(School of Law,Tsinghua University,Beijing 100084,China)

机构地区：[1]清华大学法学院,北京100084

出　　处：《中国海商法研究》2020年第4期23-30,共8页Chinese Journal of Maritime Law

基　　金：国家留学基金委“2020年国家建设高水平大学公派研究生项目”(202006210319)。

摘　　要：在货运代理转委托中,现行法未对委托人和第三人之间的请求权问题予以规定。不少司法裁判适用《合同法》第402条、第403条(《民法典》第925条、第926条),以突破合同相对性原则。在货主—货代1—货代2—承运人的层层委托关系中,将货主—货代—承运人的间接代理关系纳入货运代理转委托中的讨论十分必要。应分别在货主—货代1—货代2和货主—货代—承运人两种法律关系中对这两条的适用问题进行探讨。In sub-mandate of freight forwarding,our law says nothing about the question of claims between principal and third party.It is not uncommon for judges to apply articles 402 and 403 of the Cantact Law(articles 925 and 926 of the Civil Code)in freight forwarding to break the principle of privity of contract.In legal relationships of entrustment and re-entrustment among owner of cargo,freight forwarder 1,freight forwarder 2 and carrier,it is rather necessary to adopt the indirect agency relationship among owner of cargo,freight forwarder and carrier into the discussion of sub-mandate of freight forwarding.A critical analysis on the application of these two articles should be developed in the following two legal relationships.Firstly,in relationship among owner of cargo,freight forwarder 1 and freight forwarder 2.Secondly,in relationship among owner of cargo,freight forwarder and carrier.

关 键 词：货运代理 转委托 间接代理 合同相对性 直接请求权 

分 类 号：D922.294[政治法律—经济法学]