浮動抵押在造船抵押融資中的適用

陳倫倫

摘 要：針對我國擔保物權(quán)體系的不足導致在建船舶抵押制度不完善以致造船抵押融資發(fā)展緩慢的狀況, 順應《物權(quán)法》引入浮動抵押概念之時機，結(jié)合英美法中已建立的浮動抵押理論，探討該理論及其相關制度的引入對完善我國在建船舶抵押制度的利弊.對于浮動抵押可能產(chǎn)生的在建船舶抵押主體和效力問題，應當采用以法律規(guī)定為基本、以銀行制度為具體準則的方法予以解決.

關鍵詞：造船； 浮動抵押； 在建船舶； 在建船舶抵押

中圖分類號：F832.4； D922.28文獻標志碼：A

Application of floating charge in financing for

shipbuilding by mortgage

CHEN Lunlun

（School of Law, Shanghai Maritime Univ., Shanghai 200135, China）

Abstract： In view of the problem that financing for shipbuilding by mortgage applies very restrictedly because of the insufficiency of traditional security system, which leads to the laggard development of mortgage on ship under construction, the advantages as well as the disadvantages of the application of floating charge in mortgage on ship under construction of China are analyzed in detail taking the chance of the introduction of floating charge by Chinas Real Rights Law and based on the general introduction of the theory of floating charge in common law. The possible problems such as the subject and effect of mortgage on ship under construction, which come from the application of floating charge in practice, should be mainly resolved by the system of the bank on the basis of the regulation of law.

Key words： shipbuilding; floating charge; ship under construction; mortgage on ship under construction

0 引 言

雖然對在建船舶進行抵押貸款已成為國外市場造船融資的主要方式，但在我國仍處于新興狀態(tài).我國最大的船舶融資商業(yè)銀行——中國工商銀行近年才開始積極開拓這項業(yè)務.究其原因，主要是作為造船抵押融資核心內(nèi)容的在建船舶抵押制度缺乏規(guī)范化和可操作性，使得銀行對造船投資持觀望和試探態(tài)度.2007年10月1日起施行的《中華人民共和國物權(quán)法》（以下簡稱《物權(quán)法》）第181條規(guī)定：“經(jīng)當事人書面協(xié)議，企業(yè)、個體工商戶、農(nóng)業(yè)生產(chǎn)經(jīng)營者可以將現(xiàn)有的以及將有的生產(chǎn)設備、原材料、半成品、產(chǎn)品抵押，債務人不履行到期債務或者發(fā)生當事人約定的實現(xiàn)抵押權(quán)的情形，債權(quán)人有權(quán)就實現(xiàn)抵押權(quán)時的動產(chǎn)優(yōu)先受償.”這是不同于我國已有抵押制度的新的動產(chǎn)抵押模式.法學界普遍認為，該條規(guī)定即為起源于英國法的浮動抵押制度.浮動抵押突破傳統(tǒng)的抵押擔保理念，若將其理論及相關操作制度運用于我國在建船舶抵押制度中，既能消除作為抵押財產(chǎn)的在建船舶范圍的不確定性以及抵押人權(quán)利限制的缺陷，又能積極保障銀行抵押權(quán)的實現(xiàn)，將大大促進造船抵押融資的發(fā)展.本文擬就浮動抵押的概念及特征進行分析，在理論上探討其與我國在建船舶抵押制度結(jié)合的必要性和可行性，并就其中可能產(chǎn)生的問題提出相應的解決方案.

① Illingworth v. Houldsworth，［1904］ A.C. 355, House of Lords, Lord MACNAGHTEN: “a floating charge, is ambulatory and shifting in its nature, hovering over and so to speak floating with the property which it is intended to affect until some event occurs or some act is done which causes it to settle and fasten on the subject of the charge within its reach and grasp.”

② Evans v. Rival Granite Quarries, Ltd., ［1910］ 2 K.B. 979, the Court of Appeal, L.J. BUCKLEY: A floating security is not a future security; it is a present security, which presently affects all the assets of the company expressed to be included in it. On the other hand, it is not a specific security; the holder cannot affirm that the assets are specifically mortgaged to him. The assets are mortgaged in such a way that the mortgagor can deal with them without the concurrence of the mortgagee. A floating security is not a specific mortgage of the assets, plus a licence to the mortgagor to dispose of them in the course of his business, but is a floating mortgage applying to every item comprised in the security, `but not specifically affecting any item until some event occurs or some act on the part of the mortgagee is done which causes it to crystallize into a fixed security.