摘要
应收账款质押作为新型担保融资途径是否应置于《物权法》中饱受争议，《物权法》第223条与第228条的规定过于宽泛和原则，无法解决不断涌现的应收账款质押实务问题，权利客体内容、质权实现方式、权利冲突解决等问题亟待辨明，于适格质押标的而言，基础设施和公用事业项目收益权、拆迁补偿款、特许经营权、非明确具体的未来债权不应当列为应收账款范围之内，应将“特定化”纳入适格标的判断标准。于质权实现而言，基于双重债权的特殊性，应以清偿期届至的差异未标准进行区分考察，同时结合通知对抗主义与登记生效主义，将通知之效用贯穿始终。于权利冲突解决而言，应当以通知时间、主观恶意、合理抗辩判断抗辩权、抵销权与优先受偿权的冲突解决问题。
Whether the pledge of receivables as a new type of secured financing method should be placed under the “Property Law” is controversial. The provisions of Article 223 and Article 228 of the “Property Law” are too general and principle to solve the continuous emergence of accounts receivable. The issues of pledge practice, rights object content, realization of pledge rights, rights conflict resolution and other issues urgently need to be identified. In the case of eligible pledges, infrastructure, and public utility projects, the right to receive proceeds, compensation for demolition, franchise, unspecified future claims Should not be included in the scope of accounts receivable, ＂specification＂ should be included in the criteria for judging standards. In order to realize the realization of pledge rights, based on the special nature of double creditor rights, it is necessary to make a distinction and inspection based on the difference of the solvency period up to the standard. At the same time, the effectiveness of the notice will be permeated throughout and the combination of the notion of adversarialism and the effective of registration will be formed. In the conflict resolution of rights, it is necessary to solve the problem of conflict resolution, subjective maliciousness, reasonable defense judgment right, right of setoff and right of priority compensation.
作者
王倩云
Wang Qianyun(School of Law,Zhongnan University of Economics and Law,Wuhan 430073,China)
出处
《中南财经政法大学研究生学报》
2018年第2期135-142,共8页
Journal of the Postgraduate of Zhongnan University of Economics and Law
关键词
应收账款
通知对抗主义
抵销权
抗辩权
Accounts receivable
Informing counteracting
Set-off right
Right to defense
