Case Analysis Of Bill Disputes On Citic Dameng Limited Daxin Branch Company Accusing Gangquan Limited Company

As with Chinese characteristics, the establishment of a socialist market economic system and improvement of bills in the economic life plays an increasingly important role. With the rapid development of paper market, bill risks are increasing and disputes are also growing. How to effectively reduce instrument disputes, protect the legal rights and interests of the parties, and guarantee the safety of the market transaction order is negotiable instrument law system in our country facing important issues. Losing negotiable instrument is a common situation, and the loss of it will likely continue to circulate on the market. Whether the current bill holder is goodwill or malevolent, in general this situation raises a dispute between the loser and the holder over bill rights. According to different cases, the court’s judgment over bill owner’s recognition is always different. Due to the obscurity of current laws, similar cases tend to have a different decision from the court. Not only does this affect the authority of law in China, but it is also unfavorable to the protection of the bill rights. Solving such cases, should start from the bill endorsements. The problems for the analysis of the abstract principle of negotiable instrument theory’s application and effectiveness resolving how to distribute the burden of proof, the acquisition in good faith how to apply; this misrepresents paper loss behavior of the legal responsibility, and others. In the continuous endorsement of concerning decisions of ownership cases, according to the abstract principle of negotiable instrument theory, shall be deemed the holder right thereon, without relationship for reasons not directly before hand bill deraignment. Legal provisions shall be applicable when the allocation of burden of proof principle. Also, consider the actual situation of difficulty of proof distribution, relative to the holder, the loser shall be deemed to take a more stringent burden of proof. Holder claims the acquisition of the negotiable instrument rights on goodwill, shall comply with the requirements needed for the bill in good form. The endorsement for the legitimate holder shall enjoy the rights, and is no longer necessary to apply good faith. In instrument relief, the law of misrepresenting the bill lost does not have a clear regulation; therefore, the judgment is not standard and unified. It is necessary to perfect the relevant provisions.