应收账款质押通知的法律研究

Research on the Notification of the Pledge of Accounts Receivable

应收账款质押通知的法律效力,大陆法系存在生效主义和对抗主义两种立法例,而英美法系则多采取登记主义,质押权利登记后即对第三人(即应收账款债务人)产生约束力,而质押通知仅起到辅助提醒功能。基于对我国司法实践的考证,我国质押通知的法律效力与两大法系立法例均有差异,其实质是登记/通知区分主义。体现为质押登记系质权人与出质人之间担保物权生效、对抗要件,而质押通知则使该担保物权对第三人(即应收账款债务人)产生约束效力,限定其清偿行为。质押通知由谁发出、何时发出以及通知形式皆可由当事人自行决定,其内容不违反法律强制性规定即可。

Regarding the legal enforcement of the notification of the pledge of accounts receivable,there are two legislation models in the civil law system,which are notification effectiveness and notification antagonism.Different from the civil law system,the common law system adopted the registration antagonism,under which the pledge right will constrain the account debtor upon registration,and the notification only serves as a reminding function.Based on the research of judicial practice,the legal enforcement of the notification in China is different from the civil law system and the common law system.In China,the registration is the effectiveness and antagonism elements of the security rights,while the notification only plays the role to constrain the account debtor.The notice is issued by which party,at what time,and in what form,can be all decided by pledging parties,as long as it does not violate the mandatory provisions of the law.