creditor n 中文意思是什麼
creditor n
解釋
債主-
This paper has following main views : according to the contract benefited to the third party : firstly the third party gets rights to demand debtor performing the duty. secondly creditor has rights to ask debtor to perform his duty to the third party, and if debtor does n ' t perform his duty, creditor also has rights to claim for compensating his loss resulted from debtor. thirdly debtor can use the rights of counterplea derived from the contract to oppose the third party
本文的主要觀點有：在為第三人利益合同中，第三人擁有直接請求債務人履行債務的權利；債權人同時享有請求債務人向第三人履行債務的權利，債權人對因可歸責于債務人的事由而對自己所造成的損害有權請求賠償；債務人可以合同所產生的一切抗辯來對抗因合同受益的第三人。 -
The article deals with one of the important legal systems on insolvency legislation, the legal system of bankrupt estate, the rules are put forward about the range of bankrupt estate and the bankrupt estate ' s method handled, in order to realize to protect the creditor and bankrupt ' s benifit n welfare
本文論述了破產立法中的一項重要制度? ?破產財產制度。提出了破產財產的范圍，分配破產財產應遵循的規則，從而實現維護破產人和債權人的合法權益。 -
Though the existing bankruptcy law has stipulations about protecting legitimate rights and interests of creditor, those rights and interests have n ' t been thought highly either in legislation or in judicature
我國現行破產法雖然于其立法宗旨中明確提出了保護債權人的合法權益，但無論是在立法層面上還是在司法實踐中，破產債權人的合法權益都未得到應有的重視，甚至可以說是受到了踐踏。 -
The discuss starts from the " positive externalities " of tech - research and development, pointing out that the products of tech - research and development somewhat has the property of " public good ". without < wp = 8 > government ' s interfere, the intensity of tech - research and development by private section ca n ' t meet the need of " pareto optism " because of the " positive externalities ", as a result, the items of venture capital are insufficient and the development of venture captal will be pull back. rational policies of government expediture can internalize the " positive externalities " - transforming them to more revenue or less cost of the tech - research and development private suppliers. be feared of the high risk at the beginning of venture capital, the private section ca n ' t provide enough capital, the " capital gap " should be fetched up by government with equity capital, creditor ' s right capital, subcidy, at the same time, some other means, such as government purchase, credit guarantee, capital insurance, tax expenditure can promte private capital, is also important. in this part, the function of the above means, the establishment and enforcment of them are breafly discussed. because tax policies play a critical role in fiscal policy, r - y chart is used to analyse the relation between tax and venture capital, at last, a conclution is drawn : tax expenditure can promote venture capital
這部分論述從科技研發成果的「外溢性」入手，指出科技研發成果在不同程度上具有「公共品」性質，這種外溢性使得在純市場條件下，私人部門研發活動強度達不到社會資源配置最優的要求，也使風險投資項目來源不足， < wp = 6 >阻礙風險投資的發展。合理的政府財政支出政策可以使「外溢性」內部化。之後，論述了風險投資資本來源與政府財政支出政策的關系，由於風險投資尤其是其初期的高風險性，民間風險資本不足，應由政府以股權及債權投資、補助等財政直接支出方式彌補資本缺口，運用政府采購、財政擔保、保險、貼息、稅收優惠等間接支出方式，鼓勵民間資本進入風險投資領域也同樣重要。 -
In addition, i also discoursed that general creditor ' s right is n ' t in the range of maximum amount mortgage, and also related it is not precise
另外，論述了概括債權不在最高額抵押擔保之列，並檢討我國《擔保法》第59條規定的不嚴謹性。 -
This thesis is divided into five parts. in the first part, through the comparison between mortgage and the pledge rights, and drawing lessons from wang limin ( professor of china people ' s university ) ' s idea, the author gives a definition to the pledge rights : it ' s the rights that when the debtor does n ' t fulfill his obligation, the creditor can be given the legal rights to take possession of a house or some other property as a security for payment of money lent. then the author makes further explanation to the pledge rights from the which analyzes the legal meaning of returing the security wantonly, although the supreme court made it clear that " after the creditor returned the security to the debtor, and comfronts the third person based on the pledge rights, the court will not support it ", thecourt did n ' t explicit whether the pledge rights dies out or is invalid. the author poses out when in this situation, the pledge rights dies out
如在論述動產質權實現條件時，分析了我國《擔保法》第七十一條的不足之處並提出了自己的見解：職權人只能在非自身的原因未能受到清償時才能實現其質權；質權實現時質物價值超過約定價值的部分應歸出質人所有；而質權人怠於行使質權而使質物價值下跌的，質權人應承擔賠償責任。再如在分析任意返還質。物的法律意義時，針對最高人民法院盡管在其司法解釋中明確了「質權人將質物返i 」 a碩士學住論文v不示yw訂比』 sn正狠還于出質人後，以其質權對抗第三人的，人民法院不予支持」 ，但沒有明確此種情況下，質權是消滅還是無效的缺陷，筆者提出了質權人將質物返還于出質人或質物所有人的質權消滅的觀點。 -
This financing technique originates from t he h ousing m ortgage loan s ecuritization i n america i n 1 970s, and afterwards it is applied to the non - mortgage creditor ' s assets extensively in addition to mortgage creditor ' s rights, and develops vigorously at euro - american market in 1980s
這項融資技術起源於70年代美國的住房抵押貸款證券化，隨后證券化技術被廣泛應用於抵押債權以外的非抵押債權資產，並於80年代在歐美市場獲得蓬勃發展。 -
When the two or more mortgages which are all priority rights coexist on the same estate and its actual value after being saled ca n ' t satisfy the all creditor ' s claims, the validity of these mortgages will conflict among them, under such circumstances, which mortgage should be prior to the others ? the answer to this question would be directly relevant to whether the mortgaged debt will be paid or not and in what extent
當兩個或兩個以上的都具有優先受償效力的擔保物權同時並存於同一財產上，且該財產變賣的價值又不足以清償所負擔的數個債權時，數個擔保物權之間將發生效力沖突，此時，哪一個權利更應優先得到滿足，將直接關繫到它們所擔保的債權能否受償以及能在多大程度上受償。 -
By comparative researching to credit of bankrupt legislation of the united states, japan and china, author regards them as drawbacks of the existing legislation : 1. the field of credit of bankrupt is so narrow, legislation ca n ' t fit to reality and legitimate rig hts and interests of creditor are deprived in some degree ; 2. stipulations of report are so rigid and do n ' t divide different situation to deal with
通過對美國、日本和中國大陸破產債權立法的比較研究，筆者認為，我國破產債權立法存在的問題主要有： 1破產債權的范圍過于簡略，立法嚴重滯後於時代的發展，債權人的合法權益受到了很大程度的剝奪； 2
分享友人