On The System Of Repledge Rights

With the rapid development of the market economy,most countries have accepted the conversion system and adopted a legal repledge right model.The repledge of quality has a very obvious social value,and the exercise of repledge rights also has the economic significance of promoting financial communications,providing a convenient way for the pledgee.However,China's “Guarantee Law of the People's Republic of China”(hereinafter referred to as the “Guarantee Law”)does not mention the issue of repledge rights,and the Supreme People's Court “interpretation of certain issues concerning the use of the People's Republic of China Guarantee Law”(hereinafter referred to as “Security Law Justice Explained”)does not recognize that the pledgee enjoys the statutory right of repledge,and only recognizes the repledge right that it has agreed with the pledgor,and the “People's Republic of China Property Law”(hereinafter referred to as the “Property Law”)does not mention whether the pledgee is Having the agreed or statutory right of repledge,it only involves the burden of the pledgee.The expressions based on the Property Law are vague and contradictory to the content of the Judicial Interpretation of the Security Law.There is a conflict in the academic world.However,most scholars have not faced the issue of the right of repledge,and the focus of the dispute has been on “responsibility repledge”.In terms of quality effectiveness,in fact,the root cause of the problem is whether the pledgee can enjoy the statutory right of repledge,and whether or not we recognize the repledge right system.If we accept that the pledgee has its own legal repledge rights,then Even if there is no agreed authorization,the pledgee's repledge behavior will be effective,but the specific exercise process needs further specification.The system of repledge right in our country has not been perfected,resulting in many difficulties in judicial practice.There are no uniform standards for refereeing cases of transfer disputes.Different judges will make different decisions according to their own opinions.There is still uncertainty and disagreement on the type of repledge rights,the legal relationship between parties under the different types of repledge rights,and the commitment of the pledgee to abuse the repledge right,which has aroused the attention of the academic community to China's repledge right system.The author hopes to conduct in-depth research on the right of repledge through this article,and further put forward relevant suggestions on the improvement of the repledge right system.This paper is divided into three stages to study the pledgee's right to repledge,which mainly adopts literature review method,comparison method and case analysis method.First of all,ask questions,proceed from practice and theory,and collect the cases related to repledge rights,and introduce the difficulties faced.Analyze the incompleteness of the legal system of repledge rights and the defects in judicial application.Most scholars have come to the point of view of the right-to-peer right to repledge right and have drawn the controversy in the theoretical research.Secondly,it analyzes the problems and compares the existing system of China's existing legislation by comparing the provisions of the typical legislation of trans-national repledge rights between countries and regions,and concludes that China's relevant legislation and regulations are not yet perfect.“The judicial interpretation of security law” restricting the scope of the pledgee's right of repledge,the "Property Law" stipulates vagueness,and the emergence of ambiguity in the application of laws,etc.The foreign mature repledge right system can provide a good reference for the establishment of China's future “Civil Code” repledge right system.Finally,to solve the problem,explain the necessity and feasibility of granting the statutory repledge right to the pledgee,improve the repledge right system,type the repledge right of the pledgee,and recognize the statutory repledge right of the pledgee.The legal relationship between the parties to the repledge of the right to the type and the commitment of the pledgee to abuse the civil liability for the repledge right.The pledgee has the obligation to properly keep the pledged property,but the pledgee enjoys possession of the pledged property.During the period of pledge,the pledgee has the right to use the property for the proper use of the pledged property and exercise it.In the case of a legal repledge right,the pledger must not require the pledgee to bear the liability for compensation.Moreover,there is no contradiction or conflict between the protection of the interests of the pledger and the pledgee's right to repledge,and the pledgee's conversion of the pledge will occur during the duration of the pledge.After the pledge expires and the pledgor repays the debt,the pledgor can still demand the pledgee to return the pledged property,except that the pledgor bears the risk of not getting the property back.However,if the property is damaged or lost,the pledgee shall bear the liability to the pledgor.When the pledgee exercises the statutory right of repledge,under normal circumstances,the pledgee shall be responsible for the damage to the property as a result of the repledge of the pledgee.However,in special circumstances,if it is not the fault of the pledgee,but because of the force majeure,it should consider reducing its burden,and it may not have full compensation.Moreover,even if there is no conversion,damages will occur,and the pledgee will not have to bear the burden.It should be borne by the pledgor.Therefore,while enjoying the rights,the pledgee must also accept certain restrictions.It must also take into account the rights the pledgor and the repledge right holders should enjoy,and weigh the relations between the parties.