On The Review Obligation Of Bill Payer

Liquidity is the soul of the negotiable instrument law. Because of information asymmetry problems in bill circulation process, so the bill payer only judging from the particulars recorded on the surface of the paper bills itself is valid, judging from the ticket endorsed continuity if prompt payment of bills right flaws. Because it could not do it on paper examination as to substance, so it is easy to appear mistake payment problem. If there was an error once the payment is required the drawee shall bear the liability on a negotiable instrument law, then will seriously hamper the instrument out of circulation. So to explore the drawee how censorship duty can exempt from bear the liability for payment again, it is very necessary.This paper first describes the henan weihui municipal agricultural means of production company v. WeiHui icbc, large, large construction bank of icbc, bank draft and perpetuates the basic facts and the referee, and controversy in the case of a detailed comb, key raises the agent who WeiHui the question of whether icbc’s obligation to review.In the second chapter tells the basic theory of the drawee review obligation, first tells the story of the basic meaning of the drawee; Secondly introduces the drawee is divided into form in theory review, examination as to substance, obligations and the supplementary examination obligation, and then from the non-causative nature of ACTS, to type and the rationality of the analyzed form on any sex examination obligation, from the influence of the information asymmetry problems in the process of bill circulation and practice to operate two aspects analyzes the irrationality of substantial examination obligation. Finally on the regulation of our country about the payer review obligation was analyzed, and mainly discusses the negotiable instrument law in the second paragraph of article 57 of the concept of "malicious" and "gross negligence", and the supreme people’s court promulgated the provisions on some issues bill dispute cases, 69 were critical.In the third part using the conclusions from the second part "the drawee or his agent who just objectively perform review paper authenticity, endorsed the bearer proof of identity and continuity of obligation, subjective no malice or gross negligence can be exempted from payment due to wrong again due to the payment of the" weihui municipal agricultural means of production in henan province company v. WeiHui icbc, large, large construction bank of icbc, bank draft and perpetuates are analyzed in detail.