企業用以抵質押的動產(chan)一(yi)般屬(shu)于種類(lei)物，如(ru)卷鋼、線材(cai)、中板等(deng)鋼材(cai)，重點在于規格、種類(lei)、數量的區分(fen)，而在所有(you)權權屬(shu)的區分(fen)上(shang)，難以有(you)物理上(shang)的明確(que)界(jie)限，即使是有(you)相(xiang)應(ying)的發票(piao)(由于長期(qi)合作(zuo)、分(fen)期(qi)分(fen)批購貨(huo)等(deng)原因(yin)，發票(piao)有(you)滯后(hou)性)及入庫單、貨(huo)運單據，也容易混淆權屬(shu)。

　　為了滿(man)足(zu)中小企(qi)業(ye)(ye)的(de)(de)(de)(de)融資(zi)需求并(bing)盡可(ke)能(neng)防(fang)范風(feng)險(xian)，近幾年(nian)來，以企(qi)業(ye)(ye)動產辦(ban)理抵(質(zhi))押的(de)(de)(de)(de)貨押授(shou)(shou)信(xin)，成為各家(jia)銀(yin)行(xing)青(qing)睞的(de)(de)(de)(de)一種中小企(qi)業(ye)(ye)授(shou)(shou)信(xin)方(fang)式。在(zai)無(wu)錫地區(qu)，以南方(fang)某(mou)地人士(shi)為代表的(de)(de)(de)(de)鋼貿(mao)(mao)企(qi)業(ye)(ye)更是成為此類(lei)授(shou)(shou)信(xin)的(de)(de)(de)(de)主(zhu)力(li)軍，鋼貿(mao)(mao)企(qi)業(ye)(ye)在(zai)無(wu)錫地區(qu)授(shou)(shou)信(xin)高峰時達(da)300 余億元，僅某(mou)銀(yin)行(xing)一家(jia)就有(you)余額100 億之多(duo)。但在(zai)經濟(ji)下(xia)行(xing)、市場(chang)低(di)迷的(de)(de)(de)(de)大形勢下(xia)，上述授(shou)(shou)信(xin)方(fang)式的(de)(de)(de)(de)法(fa)律風(feng)險(xian)不可(ke)避免地逐(zhu)步暴露。

　　一(yi)、出(chu)質(zhi)人對質(zhi)押物不享有所有權的法律風險

　　【案例】一 質押物在監管(guan)期間被(bei)偷梁換柱(zhu)引起糾紛

　　某建材市場中，A 公(gong)司(si)(si)以(yi)(yi)價值(zhi)1500余萬(wan)元(yuan)的線材為其(qi)900 萬(wan)元(yuan)借(jie)款提供質押(ya)擔保。貸款發放后，A 公(gong)司(si)(si)多次(ci)出貨，后以(yi)(yi)中板為出貨后補充的質物(wu)，價值(zhi)達1000 萬(wan)元(yuan)，所(suo)有(you)權由市場方及(ji)出質人(ren)A 公(gong)司(si)(si)確認并出具入庫單證明(ming)。但隨后第三方B 公(gong)司(si)(si)以(yi)(yi)上述中板所(suo)有(you)權屬其(qi)所(suo)有(you)(暫存放于市場方)為由要求(qiu)出貨，銀行委托的監(jian)管公(gong)司(si)(si)認為中板屬于質押(ya)監(jian)管貨物(wu)，不予放行。雙(shuang)方爭執(zhi)不下，均報(bao)警處理。

　　在公(gong)(gong)安機關的介入下，市場(chang)方(fang)及出質人A 公(gong)(gong)司(si)均承認上(shang)述涉及爭(zheng)議的中(zhong)板(ban)所有權(quan)確(que)屬于(yu)第三方(fang)B 公(gong)(gong)司(si)， A公(gong)(gong)司(si)不享(xiang)有所有權(quan)。 A公(gong)(gong)司(si)為了出貨進行加工(gong)，而與市場(chang)方(fang)合謀(mou)將(jiang)第三方(fang)B 公(gong)(gong)司(si)的中(zhong)板(ban)納(na)入質押監(jian)管貨物，以彌(mi)補出貨的空缺。在中(zhong)板(ban)貨權(quan)明(ming)確(que)后(hou)，監(jian)管方(fang)只能將(jiang)貨物放行。最后(hou)銀行與公(gong)(gong)安機關對A公(gong)(gong)司(si)施壓，迫使A 公(gong)(gong)司(si)將(jiang)已經進行加工(gong)的鋼材重新入庫納(na)入監(jian)管，并(bing)提前歸還了部分貸款(kuan)，才(cai)有效降(jiang)低了貸款(kuan)風險。

　　【案(an)件評析】

　　企業(ye)用以(yi)抵(di)(di)質押(ya)的(de)(de)(de)動產一般屬于種(zhong)類物，如(ru)卷鋼、線(xian)材、中板等鋼材，重點(dian)在于規(gui)格、種(zhong)類、數量的(de)(de)(de)區(qu)分，而在所有權(quan)權(quan)屬的(de)(de)(de)區(qu)分上(shang)，難(nan)以(yi)有物理上(shang)的(de)(de)(de)明確(que)界(jie)限，即使是有相(xiang)應的(de)(de)(de)發票(piao)(由于長期合作、分期分批(pi)購貨(huo)等原因，發票(piao)有滯后性)及入(ru)庫單、貨(huo)運單據，也容易混淆(xiao)權(quan)屬。在市場實際交易過(guo)程中，各貨(huo)主按照交易習慣可以(yi)不(bu)(bu)需要書面合同(tong)就可以(yi)進行(xing)現(xian)貨(huo)調劑，而且由于貨(huo)物轉移(yi)方便(bian)，更增(zeng)加了產權(quan)區(qu)分的(de)(de)(de)難(nan)度。如(ru)果(guo)銀行(xing)及監管(guan)方操(cao)作不(bu)(bu)夠(gou)規(gui)范(fan)(如(ru)未在貨(huo)物上(shang)加貼質押(ya)給(gei)某(mou)某(mou)銀行(xing)的(de)(de)(de)標簽(qian))，還可能出現(xian)同(tong)一批(pi)貨(huo)物重復抵(di)(di)質押(ya)，重復 授信(xin)的(de)(de)(de)況。

　　抵(di)押(ya)(出(chu)質)人以第三方(fang)的(de)貨物(wu)作為自(zi)己(ji)的(de)貨物(wu)抵(di)(質)押(ya)給債權人的(de)，根據《物(wu)權法》第10 條有(you)關“善(shan)意(yi)取(qu)得”的(de)規定，只有(you)符合(he)以下條件，債權人方(fang)可(ke)取(qu)得抵(di)(質)押(ya)權：(1)債權人接受動產(chan)抵(di)(質)押(ya)時是(shi)善(shan)意(yi)的(de);(2)以合(he)理的(de)價格;(3)抵(di)(質)押(ya)依照法律(lv)規定應(ying)當(dang)登記的(de)已(yi)經(jing)登記，不需要(yao)登記的(de)已(yi)經(jing)交付給債權人。鑒此，我行(xing)在接受動產(chan)抵(di)(質)押(ya)時應(ying)注意(yi)核實動產(chan)是(shi)否為出(chu)質人所有(you)，依照法律(lv)規定，抵(di)押(ya)權經(jing)登記方(fang)生(sheng)效或產(chan)生(sheng)對抗第三人效力，應(ying)注意(yi)及(ji)時辦理登記手續。

　　二(er)、抵(di)(di)押人在(zai)抵(di)(di)押期間(jian)擅自轉讓(rang)抵(di)(di)押物

　　【案例】二 第三人主張善意取(qu)得抵押物的所有權

　　2009 年10 月21 日，某(mou)健(jian)身(shen)(shen)公司與某(mou)銀(yin)行簽訂抵(di)押(ya)(ya)合(he)同，將(jiang)(jiang)49 件健(jian)身(shen)(shen)設(she)(she)備抵(di)押(ya)(ya)給某(mou)銀(yin)行，但未(wei)辦(ban)理抵(di)押(ya)(ya)登記。抵(di)押(ya)(ya)期(qi)間，某(mou)健(jian)身(shen)(shen)公司擅自(zi)將(jiang)(jiang)健(jian)身(shen)(shen)設(she)(she)備轉(zhuan)讓(rang)與周某(mou)。因融資(zi)到期(qi)未(wei)還，某(mou)銀(yin)行起(qi)訴借款人(ren)和抵(di)押(ya)(ya)人(ren)，周某(mou)作為有獨立請求權第三人(ren)參加訴訟，主(zhu)張(zhang)善(shan)意取得健(jian)身(shen)(shen)設(she)(she)備的所有權。

　　【案件評析】

　　根據(ju)《物(wu)權法(fa)》第(di)一百九十一條(tiao)，抵(di)押(ya)(ya)(ya)期間(jian)，抵(di)押(ya)(ya)(ya)人(ren)(ren)未經(jing)抵(di)押(ya)(ya)(ya)權人(ren)(ren)同意(yi)，不(bu)得轉讓(rang)抵(di)押(ya)(ya)(ya)財產，抵(di)押(ya)(ya)(ya)人(ren)(ren)擅自轉讓(rang)抵(di)押(ya)(ya)(ya)動產的(de)(de)(de)行(xing)為(wei)屬(shu)于(yu)無(wu)權處分(fen)行(xing)為(wei);但為(wei)保護交易安(an)全和善意(yi)第(di)三(san)人(ren)(ren)的(de)(de)(de)利益，根據(ju)《物(wu)權法(fa)》第(di)106 條(tiao)，即使是(shi)無(wu)權處分(fen)行(xing)為(wei)，只要符合(he)以(yi)下條(tiao)件，受(shou)讓(rang)人(ren)(ren)仍可取得抵(di)押(ya)(ya)(ya)動產的(de)(de)(de)所有(you)權：(1)受(shou)讓(rang)人(ren)(ren)受(shou)讓(rang)抵(di)押(ya)(ya)(ya)動產時(shi)是(shi)善意(yi)的(de)(de)(de);(2)以(yi)合(he)理(li)的(de)(de)(de)價格轉讓(rang);(3)轉讓(rang)的(de)(de)(de)動產依照(zhao)法(fa)律(lv)規定不(bu)需要登記的(de)(de)(de)已經(jing)交付給受(shou)讓(rang)人(ren)(ren)。

　　在(zai)認定周某是(shi)(shi)否(fou)符(fu)合上述第(1)點(dian)“善意(yi)”條(tiao)件時(shi)，某銀行(xing)是(shi)(shi)否(fou)辦(ban)理抵(di)(di)押(ya)登(deng)記即(ji)成(cheng)為(wei)(wei)(wei)關鍵，如未辦(ban)理抵(di)(di)押(ya)登(deng)記，則周某盡合理注(zhu)意(yi)調(diao)查(cha)了抵(di)(di)押(ya)動(dong)(dong)產(chan)的(de)(de)所有(you)權歸屬的(de)(de)，即(ji)可被(bei)認為(wei)(wei)(wei)“善意(yi)”，如辦(ban)理了抵(di)(di)押(ya)登(deng)記，周某就非為(wei)(wei)(wei)“善意(yi)”，其主(zhu)張善意(yi)取(qu)得(de)抵(di)(di)押(ya)動(dong)(dong)產(chan)所有(you)權的(de)(de)主(zhu)張無法(fa)得(de)到法(fa)院支持，銀行(xing)的(de)(de)抵(di)(di)押(ya)權可以(yi)依(yi)法(fa)行(xing)使。因此，在(zai)接受(shou)動(dong)(dong)產(chan)抵(di)(di)押(ya)時(shi)，銀行(xing)應(ying)注(zhu)意(yi)及時(shi)辦(ban)理抵(di)(di)押(ya)登(deng)記手續，以(yi)避(bi)免抵(di)(di)押(ya)人擅自處(chu)置(zhi)抵(di)(di)押(ya)物的(de)(de)風險(xian)。

　　三、動(dong)產留(liu)置、抵押的(de)法律效力優先于動(dong)產質押，僅辦理動(dong)產質押不(bu)能(neng)對(dui)

　　抗留置權(quan)、抵押(ya)權(quan)的法律風險

　　【案例】三 動產抵押物放置(zhi)在承租(zu)(zu)房(fang)內，可能發生抵押權不能對抗出租(zu)(zu)人(ren)

　　留置權的風險

　　某(mou)耐(nai)(nai)力公(gong)司(si)以(yi)其設(she)備(bei)為(wei)銀行提供抵押擔保并(bing)辦理了(le)抵押登記，該批設(she)備(bei)放置(zhi)(zhi)在某(mou)投(tou)資(zi)公(gong)司(si)屬有的房(fang)屋內;某(mou)投(tou)資(zi)公(gong)司(si)以(yi)某(mou)耐(nai)(nai)力公(gong)司(si)拖欠租金(jin)為(wei)由訴至法院，主張對(dui)(dui)該批設(she)備(bei)有留置(zhi)(zhi)權。某(mou)耐(nai)(nai)力公(gong)司(si)與某(mou)投(tou)資(zi)公(gong)司(si)在審(shen)理期間達(da)成(cheng)《調解(jie)協議書》，約(yue)定某(mou)投(tou)資(zi)公(gong)司(si)享(xiang)有留置(zhi)(zhi)權，法院也傾向于(yu)認可某(mou)投(tou)資(zi)公(gong)司(si)對(dui)(dui)設(she)備(bei)享(xiang)有留置(zhi)(zhi)權。

　　【案(an)件評析】

　　留(liu)(liu)(liu)置(zhi)(zhi)權(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)優(you)先(xian)于(yu)(yu)抵(di)(di)押(ya)(ya)(ya)(ya)權(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)和(he)質(zhi)(zhi)押(ya)(ya)(ya)(ya)權(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)受(shou)償(chang)(chang)(chang)。留(liu)(liu)(liu)置(zhi)(zhi)權(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)是一種法(fa)(fa)定擔保(bao)物(wu)權(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)。物(wu)權(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)法(fa)(fa)第230 條(tiao)第1 款規(gui)定：債(zhai)務(wu)人(ren)不履(lv)行(xing)(xing)到期債(zhai)務(wu)，債(zhai)權(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)人(ren)可以(yi)留(liu)(liu)(liu)置(zhi)(zhi)已經合(he)法(fa)(fa)占有(you)(you)的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)債(zhai)務(wu)人(ren)的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)動產(chan)，并(bing)(bing)(bing)有(you)(you)權(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)就該(gai)動產(chan)優(you)先(xian)受(shou)償(chang)(chang)(chang)。《物(wu)權(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)法(fa)(fa)》第239 條(tiao)規(gui)定：同一動產(chan)上已設(she)立(li)(li)抵(di)(di)押(ya)(ya)(ya)(ya)權(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)或者(zhe)質(zhi)(zhi)權(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)，該(gai)動產(chan)又被留(liu)(liu)(liu)置(zhi)(zhi)的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)，留(liu)(liu)(liu)置(zhi)(zhi)權(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)人(ren)優(you)先(xian)受(shou)償(chang)(chang)(chang)。所(suo)以(yi)無論抵(di)(di)押(ya)(ya)(ya)(ya)權(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)、質(zhi)(zhi)押(ya)(ya)(ya)(ya)權(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)和(he)留(liu)(liu)(liu)置(zhi)(zhi)權(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)設(she)立(li)(li)時間誰在(zai)前(qian)，留(liu)(liu)(liu)置(zhi)(zhi)權(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)一律優(you)先(xian)于(yu)(yu)抵(di)(di)押(ya)(ya)(ya)(ya)權(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)、質(zhi)(zhi)押(ya)(ya)(ya)(ya)權(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)受(shou)償(chang)(chang)(chang)。經依法(fa)(fa)登(deng)記(ji)的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)抵(di)(di)押(ya)(ya)(ya)(ya)權(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)優(you)先(xian)于(yu)(yu)質(zhi)(zhi)押(ya)(ya)(ya)(ya)權(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)受(shou)償(chang)(chang)(chang)。最(zui)高人(ren)民法(fa)(fa)院(yuan)《關(guan)(guan)(guan)于(yu)(yu)適(shi)用中(zhong)(zhong)華(hua)人(ren)民共和(he)國(guo)擔保(bao)法(fa)(fa)若干(gan)問題的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)解釋》第79 條(tiao)規(gui)定：同一財產(chan)法(fa)(fa)定登(deng)記(ji)的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)抵(di)(di)押(ya)(ya)(ya)(ya)權(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)與質(zhi)(zhi)押(ya)(ya)(ya)(ya)權(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)并(bing)(bing)(bing)存時，抵(di)(di)押(ya)(ya)(ya)(ya)權(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)人(ren)優(you)先(xian)于(yu)(yu)質(zhi)(zhi)押(ya)(ya)(ya)(ya)權(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)人(ren)受(shou)償(chang)(chang)(chang)。根據(ju)該(gai)規(gui)定，抵(di)(di)押(ya)(ya)(ya)(ya)權(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)優(you)先(xian)于(yu)(yu)質(zhi)(zhi)押(ya)(ya)(ya)(ya)權(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)必須(xu)有(you)(you)個前(qian)提(ti)，即抵(di)(di)押(ya)(ya)(ya)(ya)權(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)有(you)(you)效設(she)立(li)(li)且依法(fa)(fa)登(deng)記(ji)，未經登(deng)記(ji)的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)抵(di)(di)押(ya)(ya)(ya)(ya)權(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)不得對(dui)抗善意第三人(ren)。本案中(zhong)(zhong)，銀(yin)行(xing)(xing)根據(ju)具體案情(qing)，以(yi)案外利害關(guan)(guan)(guan)系人(ren)身份(fen)向法(fa)(fa)院(yuan)提(ti)出異(yi)議。銀(yin)行(xing)(xing)認為：留(liu)(liu)(liu)置(zhi)(zhi)的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)前(qian)提(ti)是已經合(he)法(fa)(fa)占有(you)(you)動產(chan)，但(dan)抵(di)(di)押(ya)(ya)(ya)(ya)人(ren)某耐力公司(si)并(bing)(bing)(bing)非(fei)《租(zu)賃合(he)同》締(di)約(yue)方(締(di)約(yue)方為抵(di)(di)押(ya)(ya)(ya)(ya)人(ren)關(guan)(guan)(guan)聯企業)，不應受(shou)《租(zu)賃合(he)同》的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)約(yue)束，因此某投資(zi)公司(si)對(dui)抵(di)(di)押(ya)(ya)(ya)(ya)設(she)備(bei)并(bing)(bing)(bing)無合(he)法(fa)(fa)占有(you)(you)的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)合(he)同約(yue)定，不符合(he)我國(guo)《物(wu)權(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)(quan)法(fa)(fa)》中(zhong)(zhong)規(gui)定的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)留(liu)(liu)(liu)置(zhi)(zhi)的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)條(tiao)件。法(fa)(fa)院(yuan)在(zai)抵(di)(di)押(ya)(ya)(ya)(ya)設(she)備(bei)處(chu)置(zhi)(zhi)過程中(zhong)(zhong)，接受(shou)了我行(xing)(xing)觀點(dian)。

　　四、貨物監管方良莠不齊(qi)，可能存在因監管不規范(fan)導致(zhi)質押物短少的風險(xian)

　　【案例】四 監管公司(si)疏于監管導致質(zhi)押物(wu)短少

　　C 公(gong)司(si)以價值(zhi)1600萬輪(lun)胎(tai)(tai)質押向銀(yin)(yin)行貸(dai)款(kuan)800萬元，上述貨物(wu)(wu)交(jiao)由(you)(you)某(mou)(mou)監(jian)(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公(gong)司(si)監(jian)(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)。監(jian)(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)期間，某(mou)(mou)監(jian)(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公(gong)司(si)的監(jian)(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)員擅離職守，外出飲酒徹夜未歸，當(dang)夜質押的輪(lun)胎(tai)(tai)被人(ren)哄搶，在監(jian)(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)員回來后，倉庫僅(jin)余價值(zhi)70 萬元的輪(lun)胎(tai)(tai)。由(you)(you)于借(jie)款(kuan)人(ren)法(fa)(fa)定代表(biao)人(ren)去向不明，無法(fa)(fa)聯系，且質物(wu)(wu)被非法(fa)(fa)轉(zhuan)移，銀(yin)(yin)行當(dang)即(ji)與監(jian)(jian)(jian)公(gong)司(si)協商，要求監(jian)(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公(gong)司(si)進行解決，但監(jian)(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公(gong)司(si)百般(ban)推諉。最后銀(yin)(yin)行將監(jian)(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公(gong)司(si)起訴到法(fa)(fa)庭，要求賠(pei)償貸(dai)款(kuan)及利息相(xiang)當(dang)的質物(wu)(wu)損失。

　　【案件(jian)評析】

　　銀行(xing)向客戶(hu)發放(fang)授信(xin)(xin)，客戶(hu)以動產作(zuo)抵(di)(di)質押擔保。作(zuo)為客戶(hu)的(de)第二還款來源，抵(di)(di)質押物(wu)的(de)安全直接決定了銀行(xing)授信(xin)(xin)的(de)安全，而監(jian)管(guan)方(fang)能否(fou)監(jian)管(guan)到位(wei)是影(ying)響抵(di)(di)質押物(wu)安全的(de)關鍵。近幾(ji)年(nian)，由于貨(huo)押授信(xin)(xin)的(de)興起(qi)，貨(huo)押監(jian)管(guan)公(gong)(gong)司也如雨后(hou)春筍(sun)般(ban)紛(fen)紛(fen)成立，監(jian)管(guan)公(gong)(gong)司難免良莠(you)不(bu)齊(qi)，監(jian)管(guan)公(gong)(gong)司的(de)選擇也就尤為重要。本案中監(jian)管(guan)公(gong)(gong)司的(de)監(jian)管(guan)員(yuan)脫離工作(zuo)崗位(wei)，監(jian)管(guan)公(gong)(gong)司員(yuan)工素質可(ke)見一斑;出(chu)現問(wen)題后(hou)，監(jian)管(guan)公(gong)(gong)司理應(ying)面對(dui)現實(shi)，積極(ji)解決問(wen)題，但卻百般(ban)推諉，嚴重缺(que)乏職業(ye)道德;而且該公(gong)(gong)司雖然(ran)注冊(ce)資(zi)金(jin)達億元，但既無固(gu)定資(zi)產，也無多少存款，其賠付能力值得懷(huai)疑。

 　　銀行在選擇(ze)(ze)監管公(gong)司(si)時(shi)，應重點選擇(ze)(ze)制(zhi)度健全、操(cao)作(zuo)規范、實力雄厚(hou)的監管公(gong)司(si)，本地成立且(qie)能夠有自(zi)己的倉庫或保管場地為更(geng)佳(jia)。

　　五、質押交(jiao)付行為不明顯，可能(neng)引起(qi)質權(quan)有效(xiao)性的爭議(yi)

　　【案例】五 監(jian)管公司(si)在(zai)發生(sheng)監(jian)管風險后想方設法逃避責任

　　D 公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)以鍍鋅管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)提供質(zhi)(zhi)押向(xiang)銀(yin)行(xing)借款(kuan)1000 萬(wan)元，某(mou)監(jian)(jian)(jian)(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)向(xiang)銀(yin)行(xing)出具監(jian)(jian)(jian)(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)單后，銀(yin)行(xing)發(fa)放貸(dai)款(kuan)。2012 年2 月(yue)，監(jian)(jian)(jian)(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)致(zhi)函銀(yin)行(xing)，稱質(zhi)(zhi)押貨(huo)物(wu)剩余數(shu)量嚴(yan)重不(bu)足(zu)(zu)，要求(qiu)銀(yin)行(xing)通知(zhi)出質(zhi)(zhi)人(ren)(ren)(ren)補足(zu)(zu)貨(huo)物(wu)。銀(yin)行(xing)認為(wei)(wei)監(jian)(jian)(jian)(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)應承(cheng)擔(dan)(dan)(dan)責(ze)任，在(zai)交涉期間(jian)，監(jian)(jian)(jian)(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)想方設法逃避(bi)責(ze)任：一、向(xiang)公(gong)(gong)(gong)安機關報案(an)(an)，稱出質(zhi)(zhi)人(ren)(ren)(ren)、市場方涉嫌貸(dai)款(kuan)詐騙犯罪(銀(yin)行(xing)貸(dai)款(kuan)前貨(huo)物(wu)數(shu)量不(bu)足(zu)(zu));二、認為(wei)(wei)質(zhi)(zhi)權生(sheng)效(xiao)以質(zhi)(zhi)物(wu)交付(fu)為(wei)(wei)生(sheng)效(xiao)要件，本案(an)(an)中(zhong)質(zhi)(zhi)物(wu)在(zai)出質(zhi)(zhi)人(ren)(ren)(ren)的(de)倉庫中(zhong)，且還有出質(zhi)(zhi)人(ren)(ren)(ren)的(de)保管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)員負責(ze)保管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)，說明貨(huo)物(wu)并未交付(fu)，因此質(zhi)(zhi)權未生(sheng)效(xiao)，監(jian)(jian)(jian)(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)不(bu)應向(xiang)銀(yin)行(xing)承(cheng)擔(dan)(dan)(dan)賠(pei)償(chang)責(ze)任;三、在(zai)與(yu)銀(yin)行(xing)交涉過程中(zhong)，通過錄(lu)音等方式(shi)，企圖證實(shi)銀(yin)行(xing)明知(zhi)貨(huo)物(wu)不(bu)足(zu)(zu)卻放款(kuan)，從而(er)免除賠(pei)償(chang)責(ze)任。銀(yin)行(xing)認為(wei)(wei)貨(huo)物(wu)存放于監(jian)(jian)(jian)(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)租賃的(de)倉庫中(zhong)，監(jian)(jian)(jian)(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)根(gen)據《質(zhi)(zhi)押物(wu)監(jian)(jian)(jian)(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)協議》，代質(zhi)(zhi)權人(ren)(ren)(ren)對貨(huo)物(wu)實(shi)施了占有、保管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)行(xing)為(wei)(wei)，故質(zhi)(zhi)權有效(xiao)，銀(yin)行(xing)在(zai)監(jian)(jian)(jian)(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)出具監(jian)(jian)(jian)(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)單后才放款(kuan)，現(xian)質(zhi)(zhi)物(wu)無故短少，監(jian)(jian)(jian)(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)應對銀(yin)行(xing)承(cheng)擔(dan)(dan)(dan)賠(pei)償(chang)責(ze)任。

　　【案件評(ping)析】

　　按(an)照擔保法(fa)及物(wu)(wu)權(quan)(quan)法(fa)的(de)(de)(de)相關規定(ding)，動產質(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)權(quan)(quan)生(sheng)效以交(jiao)付(fu)為(wei)(wei)生(sheng)效要(yao)件。在貨(huo)(huo)押(ya)授信實際業務操作中(zhong)，質(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)權(quan)(quan)人(ren)(ren)并不(bu)(bu)直接占(zhan)有(you)(you)質(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)物(wu)(wu)，而(er)是(shi)委(wei)托監(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公(gong)司(si)代為(wei)(wei)占(zhan)有(you)(you)并進行質(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)物(wu)(wu)監(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)，從而(er)完成了貨(huo)(huo)物(wu)(wu)交(jiao)付(fu)，保證了質(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)權(quan)(quan)人(ren)(ren)質(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)權(quan)(quan)的(de)(de)(de)合(he)法(fa)有(you)(you)效，因此(ci)明(ming)(ming)確(que)了監(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公(gong)司(si)與(yu)(yu)質(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)權(quan)(quan)人(ren)(ren)的(de)(de)(de)委(wei)托關系尤(you)為(wei)(wei)重要(yao)。或(huo)(huo)許是(shi)出(chu)于(yu)規避監(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)費如何承擔的(de)(de)(de)需要(yao)，銀行的(de)(de)(de)《質(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)押(ya)物(wu)(wu)監(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)協(xie)議(yi)(yi)(yi)》及附(fu)件中(zhong)僅提(ti)出(chu)出(chu)質(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)人(ren)(ren)、質(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)權(quan)(quan)人(ren)(ren)同意交(jiao)由銀行指定(ding)的(de)(de)(de)監(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公(gong)司(si)占(zhan)有(you)(you)、保管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)，但未明(ming)(ming)確(que)監(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公(gong)司(si)的(de)(de)(de)占(zhan)有(you)(you)受銀行委(wei)托或(huo)(huo)授權(quan)(quan)，即銀行占(zhan)有(you)(you)貨(huo)(huo)物(wu)(wu)的(de)(de)(de)行為(wei)(wei)并不(bu)(bu)明(ming)(ming)顯，為(wei)(wei)質(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)權(quan)(quan)是(shi)否有(you)(you)效的(de)(de)(de)爭議(yi)(yi)(yi)埋下(xia)伏筆。如果(guo)監(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公(gong)司(si)未有(you)(you)單獨的(de)(de)(de)倉(cang)(cang)庫或(huo)(huo)場地(di)，而(er)是(shi)將貨(huo)(huo)物(wu)(wu)存(cun)放于(yu)出(chu)質(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)人(ren)(ren)的(de)(de)(de)倉(cang)(cang)庫，且物(wu)(wu)理(li)分隔并不(bu)(bu)明(ming)(ming)顯，則可能對質(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)權(quan)(quan)人(ren)(ren)更為(wei)(wei)不(bu)(bu)利(li)。建議(yi)(yi)(yi)在《質(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)押(ya)物(wu)(wu)監(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)協(xie)議(yi)(yi)(yi)》或(huo)(huo)附(fu)件中(zhong)明(ming)(ming)確(que)監(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公(gong)司(si)占(zhan)有(you)(you)貨(huo)(huo)物(wu)(wu)源自銀行的(de)(de)(de)授權(quan)(quan)或(huo)(huo)委(wei)托，并要(yao)求貨(huo)(huo)物(wu)(wu)存(cun)放于(yu)監(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公(gong)司(si)自有(you)(you)倉(cang)(cang)庫或(huo)(huo)場地(di);如存(cun)入(ru)出(chu)質(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)人(ren)(ren)倉(cang)(cang)庫，應(ying)由監(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公(gong)司(si)與(yu)(yu)出(chu)質(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)人(ren)(ren)簽署書面租賃協(xie)議(yi)(yi)(yi)，且要(yao)保證物(wu)(wu)理(li)

　　分隔明顯，便于實際(ji)控(kong)制和監管。

　　六、動產質押出現(xian)質物滅失，訴(su)訟主體難以抉擇，且(qie)可能出現(xian)被訴(su)風險。

　　在案例四(si)中，因監管(guan)公司(si)監管(guan)員擅離職守(shou)，導致處置貨物被非法(fa)轉(zhuan)移，銀行(xing)喪(sang)失第二還款來源。如何依法(fa)訴訟(song)維(wei)權，成為(wei)一個(ge)新(xin)的課題亟需研究。

　　(一)訴訟主體的選(xuan)擇(ze)——起訴借(jie)款人(ren)還是監管公司(si)?

　　在無錫地區的司法(fa)實(shi)踐中(zhong)，由于監管(guan)糾(jiu)紛(fen)(fen)與貸款糾(jiu)紛(fen)(fen)分(fen)屬不同(tong)的法(fa)律關(guan)系，法(fa)院一般不同(tong)意合(he)并(bing)審理。銀(yin)行(xing)必須(xu)作出(chu)選擇：要么起(qi)訴(su)監管(guan)公司要求賠(pei)償質物滅失損失，要么起(qi)訴(su)借款人(ren)要求承擔還本付息(xi)義務。

　　我們認為，如果(guo)借(jie)款(kuan)人經營正常，則要(yao)求借(jie)款(kuan)人限期補足(zu)(zu)擔保物，否則立(li)即訴訟催收(為了節約人力、物力并避免同時樹敵，不建議分兩案(an)同時起訴監管公司(si)(si));在執行中受償不足(zu)(zu)，仍(reng)然可(ke)以起訴監管公司(si)(si)。

　　如果借款(kuan)(kuan)企(qi)業(ye)還款(kuan)(kuan)能力弱，可以(yi)(yi)直(zhi)接選擇起(qi)訴監(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公司要求賠(pei)償(chang)(chang)損失。如果以(yi)(yi)監(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)合同(tong)糾紛(法院或(huo)以(yi)(yi)質(zhi)(zhi)押合同(tong)糾紛、保管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)合同(tong)糾紛立案)起(qi)訴監(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公司，則又面臨標的額的確定問(wen)題：是(shi)以(yi)(yi)主張貸(dai)(dai)款(kuan)(kuan)本(ben)息還是(shi)主張出(chu)質(zhi)(zhi)貨物的價值。我們主張起(qi)訴貨物價值的一(yi)部分(相當(dang)于(yu)貸(dai)(dai)款(kuan)(kuan)本(ben)息的金額)作(zuo)為訴訟賠(pei)償(chang)(chang)金額，既有利于(yu)消除貸(dai)(dai)款(kuan)(kuan)風險，有銀(yin)行(xing)與出(chu)質(zhi)(zhi)人、監(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公司所簽(qian)訂的三方(fang)《質(zhi)(zhi)押物監(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)協(xie)議》中(zhong)，一(yi)般(ban)均有類似(si)條款(kuan)(kuan)：出(chu)質(zhi)(zhi)人、質(zhi)(zhi)權人同(tong)意交由銀(yin)行(xing)指(zhi)定的監(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公司占有、保管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)，如果監(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公司疏(shu)于(yu)監(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)，出(chu)質(zhi)(zhi)人也應當(dang)承擔相應的責任;特別是(shi)監(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公司多租賃出(chu)質(zhi)(zhi)人的倉庫，如果發(fa)生(sheng)盜竊(qie)、哄搶(qiang)等事件(jian)原則，出(chu)質(zhi)(zhi)人也應承擔責任。如果發(fa)生(sheng)出(chu)質(zhi)(zhi)人向銀(yin)行(xing)索賠(pei)，銀(yin)行(xing)應積極(ji)應對維(wei)護合法權益;在(zai)起(qi)訴監(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公司時，應該(gai)要求監(jian)(jian)管(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)公司全額賠(pei)償(chang)(chang)質(zhi)(zhi)物損失。