whendefining“assignment”,alsodefines“receivables”as“anundividedinterestintheassignor’scontractualrighttopaymentofamonetarysum”.Thescopeofany“contractualright”isaratherbroadscope,whichisfollowedbyadetaillistofexclusionsandlimitationsunderwhichtheconventiondoesnotapply.Accordingtoarticle4oftheUNCITRALConvention,
　　
　　(1)Theconventiondoesnotapplytoassignmenttoanindividualforhisorherpersonal,familyorhouseholdpurposes;
　　
　　Wecouldfindtheverywordinarticle1(2)ofUNIDROITConvention,wherewhenlimitsreceivablestothefieldas“arisingfromcontractsofsaleofgoodsmadebetweenthesupplieranditscustomers”,itexcludes“thoseforthesaleofgoodsboughtprimarilyfortheirpersonal,familyorhouseholduse”.Butoncloserexaminationwewouldfindtheexclusioncontainedinthetwoconventionsisnotthesame:theUNIDROITConventionexcludestheassignmentofconsumerreceivablesfromitssphereofapplicationwhiletheUNCITRALConventionexcludesassignmentmadeforconsumerpurposes.Thefourkindsofpossiblerelationsareillustratedinthefollowingchart:
　　
　　Receivables    Assignment    Whichconventionmaygovern
　　ConsumerReceivables    Forconsumerpurpose    Neither
　　ConsumerReceivables    ForCommercialpurpose    UNCITRALConvention
　　CommercialReceivables    Forconsumerpurpose    UNIDROITConvention
　　CommercialReceivables    ForCommercialpurpose    Both
　　
　　Thefirstsituationisnotdifficulttounderstandwheretheconsumerreceivablesareassignedforconsumerpurpose.It’sageneralpracticethatinternationalconventiondoesnotregulateonpurepersonalmatters,letalonetheUNCITRALisanorganizationundertheUnitedStatesconcentratingoninternationaltradematters;Underthesecondsituation,whereconsumerreceivablesareassignedforcommercialpurpose,itcannotbegovernedbytheUNIDROITConvention,butstillcouldbesubjecttotheUNCITRALConvention;Underthethirdsituation,wherecommercialreceivablesareassignedforconsumerpurpose,logicallytheUNDROITConventionshallgovern,butconsideringtheUNDROITConventionisaconventiononinternationalfactoring,wherefactorsareallbanksandotherfinancialinstitutions,thereceivablesarenotpossibletobeassignedforconsumerpurpose,sothissituationdoesnotexist;Underthelastsituationwherecommercialreceivablesareassignedforcommercialpurpose,bothoftheconventionsmaybeapplied.
　　
　　UNIDROIT’sattitudeisunderstandablethatbanksdon’twantconsumerreceivables,forpressingforpaymentfromindividualsis,inanywaytroublesomeandlowprofit.Thusexclusionoftheseconsumerreceivablesisanaturalchoice.UNCITRALConventionsubstitutetheexclusionofconsumerreceivablestoexclusionofreceivablesassignedforconsumerpurpose,regardlessofthereceivablesisconsumerorcommercialone,thusexpandthesphereofapplicationoftheconvention.Thisexpansionisjustifiedforreceivables,oncecomingintobeing,shallbeseparatedfromtheunderlyingcontractforthesaleofgoods.Nomatterthegoodsareboughtforpersonalpurposeorforcommercialpurpose,debthascomeintobeing.Theconventionputtheemphasisonthecharacterofreceivablesassignment,notthecharacterofunderlyingcontract.
　　
　　(2)Theconventiondoesnotapplytoassignmentaspartofthesaleorchangeintheownershiporlegalstatusofthebusinessoutofwhichtheassignedreceivablesarose
　　
　　Consideringthecomplexityinthefieldofbusinesstransferandthegreatinconsistencyamongvariousjurisdictions,theconventionthusleavethispartuntouched.IfUNCITRALConventioninsiststoregulateonthissector,itwouldfacegreatdifficultywhenbeingratifiedbyStates.Forthisreason,theconventionchoosesacarefulattitudeandexcludesthispartoutofitssphereofapplication.
　　
　　(3)ThisConventiondoesnotapplytoassignmentsofreceivablesarisingunderorfrom:transactionsonaregulatedexchange,financialcontractsgovernedbynettingagreements,exceptareceivableowedontheterminationofalloutstandingtransactionsforeignexchangetransactions,inter-bankpaymentsystems,inter-bankpaymentagreementsorclearanceandsettlementsystemsrelatingtosecuritiesorotherfinancialassetsorinstruments,transferofsecurityrightsin,sale,loanorholdingoforagreementtorepurchasesecuritiesorotherfinancialassetsorinstrumentsheldwithanintermediary,bankdeposits,letterofcreditorindependentguarantee,
　　
　　Inthisarticle,theconventionmadeadetailandexhaustivelistonsomereceivablesexcluded.Afterreadingthislistcarefully,onemightfindtheseexclusionsaremostlyinthefinancialfields.Sincefinancialsectorisofvitalimportancetothenationaleconomyanditsfluctuationinfluencesthesocietyalot,nearlyalltheStatesputthissectorunderitsownjurisdiction,anddifferentStates’regulationsvariesalot.Forthesamereasonabove,theconventionleavethispartuntouched.
　　
　　IV.    SphereofApplication:PartyAutonomyandExclusion
　　
　　Bothoftheconventionssetforththatpartiestoreceivablesassignmentmaychoosetoexcludetheapplicationofthesaidconventions.
　　Accordingtoarticle3oftheUNIDROITConvention,TheapplicationofthisConventionmaybeexcluded:
　　(a)    bythepartiestothefactoringcontract;or
　　
　　(b)bythepartiestothecontractofsaleofgoods,asregardsreceivablesarisingatorafterthetimewhenthefactorhasbeengivennoticeinwritingofsuchexclusion.
　　
　　Similarly,article6oftheUNCITRALConventionprovides,theassignor,theassigneeandthedebtormayderogatefromorvarybyagreementprovisionsofthisConventionrelatingtotheirrespectiverightsandobligations.ButunlikeUNIDROITConvention,whichstipulatesthatsuchexclusionmaybemadeonlyasregardstheConventionasawhole,theUNCITRALConventionstipulatesthatagreementtoderogatefromthisconventiondoesnotaffecttherightsofanypersonwhoisnotapartytotheagreement.
　　
　　V.Conclusion
　　
　　Iftheinternationaluniformlaw’ssphereofapplicationisnotbroaderenough,i.e.someissueswillstillbesubjecttovariousdomesticlawsystem,theuncertaintyexistscannotbethoroughlyremoved,whichiscontraveningtheverypurposeofuniformlawconventions.ComparedwithUNIDROITConvention,theUNCITRALhasexpandedalotinitssphereofapplicationandprogressedforwardonthewaytouniformity.Ithasbeenarguedgiventheconvention’spotentialimpactoninternationaltrade,itmaybecomethemostimportantworkthatUNCITRALhasdonesofar.
　　
　　Inthemeantime,thebroadertheconvention’ssphereofapplicationis,thedifficultitistoberatifiedbycertaincountry.Upuntiltheendof2002,theUNCITRALConventionh

上一页  [1] [2] [3] [4]  下一页