Research On The Hot Issues In The Revision Of The Negotiable Instruments Law Of China

The negotiable instruments law are norms adjusting the behaviors and relationships in negotiable instruments transaction,and it is also the legalization of negotiable instruments practice rules and habits.With the development of social economy,negotiable instruments market is increasingly active,and negotiable instruments disputes tend to be more complicated and diversified.The lag of China's negotiable instruments legal system is gradually prominent,it is necessary to revise it.This paper first proposes the revision of the negotiable instruments law should be intended to follow the principles of maintaining the circulation of negotiable instruments and ensuring the safety of transactions.On the premise of following the above principles,this paper uses the concept analysis method,literature analysis method and comparative research method to study the problems such as non-causation principle of negotiable instruments,blank negotiable instruments and risk bearing of forged endorsement.After analyzing the outstanding problems of China's negotiable instruments legislation in these aspects,this paper makes a targeted investigation of the relevant legislation in the Geneva law system and the Anglo-American law system,finds the useful experience for reference and puts forward feasible suggestions for improvement.In terms of non-causation principle of negotiable instruments,this paper suggests that the negotiable instruments law should clearly establish the principle of relative non-causation of negotiable instruments in the general provisions and designs the specific provision expression.Meanwhile,it also concludes and hackles the conflicts and exceptions with non-causation principle of negotiable instruments in law,administrative regulation and judicial interpretation.In terms of blank negotiable instruments,this paper suggests we should absorb the mature experience of two legal systems,expand the types of blank negotiable instruments and the scopes of supplementary item,clarify the effectiveness of blank negotiable instruments and distinguish the different consequences of the supplementary actions that do not meet the agreement,so as to more effectively play the functions of blank negotiable instruments in facilitating transactions and activating the market.In terms of risk bearing of forged endorsement,this paper proposes that the first paragraph of Article 32 of the Negotiable Instruments Law should be deleted to eliminate the confusion of the rules of the bearer's risk bearing in the current law,clarifies formal review obligations of the drawee to eliminate the contradictions in the current legislation,and faces squarely the attributable situations of the person who was forged in the endorsement forgery and its responsibility and so on.