Sheng Dian Practice. Zhou Ning: Study on the effectiveness of offline recourse behavior of electronic commercial bills of exchange.
Loading...
2024.05.08
The validity of offline recourse for electronic commercial bills is a common issue in bill disputes. It is often disputed in practice, but most courts still believe that offline recourse is valid. On October 11, 2021, the Beijing Financial Court issued a Civil Judgment with the case number (2021) Jing 74 Min Zhong No. 188, finding that electronic commercial bills of exchange must be pursued online. The judgment was later selected as one of the top ten typical cases of the Beijing Financial Court in 2021, which triggered heated discussions.
On June 9, 2022, Beijing Tongzhou District People's Court issued the Civil Judgment with the case number (2021) Beijing 0112 Minchu 36152. Consistent with (2021) Beijing 74 Min Zhong No. 188 Referee Concept.
Main referee gist:
1.(2021) Beijing 74 Minzong No. 188
(2021) civil judgment of Beijing 74 min zong no 188 mainly finds:
Article 62 1, Article 5 2, Article 66 3, article 67 4 stipulates that for electronic commercial bills, the "Measures for the Administration of Electronic Commercial Bills" shall apply to the "Measures for the Administration of Electronic Commercial Bills". The constituent elements of an electronic commercial bill of exchange for non-payment recourse to all predecessors are: 鈶?prompt payment during the prompt payment period or prompt payment beyond the prompt payment period but prompt payment has been issued during the prompt payment period; 鈶?proof of non-payment shall be provided; 鈶?recourse must be processed through the electronic commercial bill of exchange system.
In the end, the court revoked the first-instance judgment on the grounds that the plaintiff's prompt payment before the due date of the electronic commercial bill did not meet the constituent requirements of refusing recourse to all predecessors, reject all claims of the plaintiff.
2.(2021) Beijing 0112 Minchu No. 36152
(2021) the civil judgment of the 0112 people's Republic of China No. 36152 mainly finds that according to article 4 of the negotiable instruments law,
In this case, because one of the commercial tickets requested by the plaintiff failed to be recovered within the time limit through the electronic commercial bill system, the application for the commercial ticket was rejected.
In addition to the above-mentioned cases, there are still some cases that consider offline recourse to be effective, such as the Supreme Court's (2021) Supreme French People's Application No. 2878 case.
(I) Electronic Commercial Bill Definitions
Electronic commercial bills of exchange, which are not clearly defined in the Bills of Exchange Act. Article 2 of the Measures for the Administration of Electronic Commercial Bill of Exchange Business stipulates: "An electronic commercial bill of exchange is an instrument in which the drawer, relying on the electronic commercial bill of exchange system, is produced in the form of a data message and entrusts the payer to pay a fixed amount unconditionally to the payee or bearer on a specified date." & nbsp; In other words, electronic commercial bills of exchange are still bills, but based on their "electronic" intangible characteristics, they are different from paper. The bill actor relies on network and computer technology to receive, store and send electronic commercial bills of exchange data messages 7, thus, the ticket is issued, stored and traded.
(II) the main meaning of "online" and "offline" recourse behavior
Because of the difference between electronic commercial bills and traditional paper bills, when the right of payment request cannot be realized, the holder of electronic commercial bills can pursue it online through the electronic commercial bill system, there are also some holders who are used to recourse under the traditional paper bill of exchange. As a result, there are two ways of recourse: "online" and "offline" in the process of electronic commercial bill of exchange.
Electronic commercial bills, in the usual sense of "online" behavior, mainly through the electronic commercial bill system 8 acts such as bill issuance, endorsement, and recourse. After consulting the Shanghai Stock Exchange 9, the electronic commercial bill system mainly provides a platform and interface for the issuance and circulation of electronic commercial bills, and the service provider of the parties is the bank. The specific process is first by the parties according to the requirements of different banks, the bill business operation, and then by the bank through the electronic commercial bill system platform to transmit the bill business data, so as to carry out the bill issuance, circulation and so on. The electronic commercial bill of exchange system mainly provides the platform and interface, as well as the management, receiving, transmitting and forwarding of data. The same is true of online recourse for electronic commercial bills of exchange.
The main form of offline recourse usually refers to recourse outside the electronic commercial bill of exchange system by issuing a recourse letter, a lawyer's letter, filing a lawsuit with the court, etc.
(III) the main source of the battle for the effectiveness of "offline" recourse
Online recourse for electronic commercial bills of exchange is undoubtedly effective when the basic premise of recourse is met. However, there is still controversy in practice about whether the offline recourse of electronic commercial bills is effective.
article 5 of the measures for the administration of electronic commercial bill business stipulates: "the business of issuing, accepting, endorsing, guaranteeing, prompting payment and recourse of electronic commercial bills must be handled through the electronic commercial bill system." The expression "must" is understood by the referee as only online recourse, and offline recourse is invalid. At the same time, there are also referees who believe that offline recourse cannot be determined to be invalid based on this article alone. This article is the main source of the dispute over the effectiveness of offline recourse.
(I) Case Retrieval Data
the author searched the magic weapon website of Peking university with the key words of "electronic commercial bill" and "offline recourse". there were 510 cases involving 28 provinces, municipalities and autonomous regions. The author takes a total of 228 cases in Beijing, Shanghai, Tianjin, Chongqing, Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Guangdong, Hunan and Jiangxi as examples [the website shows a total of 240 cases, and after screening out duplicate cases, the actual total is 226; In addition, apart from the (2021) Beijing 0112 Minchu 36152 case as a duplicate case, there are 2 cases, totaling 228 cases] to check the judicial practice, how to determine the effectiveness of offline recourse for electronic commercial bills of exchange.
some of the 228 cases: a. no recourse; B. insufficient evidence; C. no recourse within the term of the bill; C. no recourse within the term of the bill; C. within the time limit, both on-line recourse and offline recourse; d. During the term, only online recourse; e. During the term, only offline recourse and other circumstances. Because the facts of some cases are particularly clear in the form of recourse, the author mainly counts the cases in which offline recourse is invalid.
the supreme court has a total of 1 case, and no case considers offline recourse invalid (offline recourse is considered valid); Financial courts (including Beijing Financial Court and Shanghai Financial Court) have a total of 60 cases, and 1 case considers offline recourse invalid; Guangdong courts have a total of 62 cases, 14 of which found offline recourse invalid; beijing courts (except financial courts) have a total of 24 cases, 1 of which found offline recourse invalid. Jiangsu courts have a total of 24 cases, 1 of which found offline recourse invalid; Zhejiang courts have a total of 18 cases, 1 of which found offline recourse invalid; Shanghai courts (except financial courts) have a total of 17 cases, none of which found offline recourse invalid; Hunan courts have a total of 10 cases, one case considered offline recourse invalid; Chongqing courts had a total of 6 cases, and no case considered offline recourse invalid; Jiangxi courts had a total of 4 cases, 3 of which considered offline recourse invalid (the remaining 1 case was online recourse); Tianjin courts had a total of 2 cases, and 1 case considered offline recourse invalid. The vast majority of court jurisprudence holds that offline recourse is effective. The chart appears as follows:
(II) Referee's Point of View
in addition to the above-mentioned (2021) Beijing 74 min zong 188 and (2021) Beijing 0112 min chu 36152 cases, which consider offline recourse invalid, some courts also believe that: a. recourse is made directly to the court, do not comply with the legal procedures and requirements for the presentation of electronic bills 10; B. If offline recourse is adopted, the person subject to recourse cannot obtain the corresponding bills after paying off, which will result in the person subject to recourse being unable to exercise the right of recourse; C electronic commercial bills are supervised by financial institutions such as the people's bank of China through the electronic commercial bill system. offline recourse may cause bills to flow outside the electronic commercial bill system, thus threatening financial security, etc. 11, think offline recourse is invalid.
there are also some cases that believe that offline recourse is effective. for example, the supreme court's (2021) supreme fa min Shen no 2878 case holds that "although the shipping department did not issue a notice of recourse to Henan shenma company in the electronic commercial bill system, however, it does not affect the exercise of the right of recourse to bills by way of litigation, and the right of litigation of the distribution office cannot be excluded on the grounds of violation of the provisions of the Measures for the Administration of Electronic Commercial Bills of Exchange Business".
according to the study of the above cases, the author searched the relevant legal provisions and consulted the Shanghai bill exchange. the author thinks:
Prerequisites for (I) Recourse
Article 61 12-= 12 fyle "px;">13, Article 68 14, Article 17 (1) 15, article 4 of the Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Trial of Bills Disputes 16 stipulates that the holder must meet the following conditions to exercise the right of recourse: 鈶?the bill of exchange has expired and has been refused payment, or although it has not expired, however, the right of recourse can only be exercised when the holder's right of claim for payment cannot be realized; 鈶?When exercising the right of recourse, the proof of refusal, or the reason for refund, or other materials that can replace the proof of refusal shall be provided; 鈶?Exercise the right of recourse within the limitation period of the instrument.
(II) offline recourse effectiveness argument
I prefer that offline recourse is effective. Or to take a step back, the author believes that the offline recourse through litigation is effective, and other offline recourse methods, such as recourse letters and lawyer letters, are more appropriate. The specific argument is as follows:
1. On whether the Measures for the Administration of Electronic Commercial Bill Business can be used as the basis for adjudication
In my opinion, according to Article 109 of the Negotiable Instruments Law 17, article 62 of the provisions of the supreme people's court on several issues concerning the trial of bill dispute cases stipulates that, to a certain extent, the measures for the administration of electronic commercial bill business can be used as the basis for judgment, but the premise is that it does not conflict with the superior law, and the degree of application is "can" and "reference.
2. According to Article 5 of the Measures for the Administration of Electronic Commercial Bill Business, can it be considered that electronic commercial bills can only be recovered online and offline recovery is invalid
article 5 of the measures for the administration of electronic commercial bill business stipulates: "the business of issuing, accepting, endorsing, guaranteeing, prompting payment and recourse of electronic commercial bills must be handled through the electronic commercial bill system."
The author thinks that offline recourse cannot be considered invalid according to Article 5 of the Measures for the Administration of Electronic Commercial Bill Business.
First of all, electronic commercial bills of exchange are also a form of expression of bills in addition to the difference between carriers and paper bills, and their rights and obligations should still follow the constraints of relevant laws and regulations such as the Bills of Exchange Law. This should be the case even if the electronic commercial bill of exchange and the Measures for the Administration of Electronic Commercial Bill of Exchange Business were introduced after the implementation of the Bill Law.
18 stipulates that the holder shall notify the forehand or each bill debtor in writing of the reason for rejection, and does not limit other specific ways of exercising the right of recourse to the bill. The "Measures for the Administration of Electronic Commercial Bill Business" has the effect of departmental rules, and according to the second paragraph of Article 91 of the the People's Republic of China Legislation Law 19, departmental rules shall not be set to derogate from the rights of citizens, legal persons and other organizations. Therefore, when the Bill Law does not limit the specific manner in which the right of recourse for bills is exercised, the Measures for the Administration of Electronic Commercial Bill of Exchange Business shall not limit that manner. If limited, it involves a violation of the provisions of the the People's Republic of China Legislation Law and derogation of the rights of the holder.
Secondly, the bearer exercises the right of recourse against the endorser, the drawer and other debtors of the bill of exchange, which is essentially about the meaning of "recourse" to reach the opposite party. Article 137 of the Civil Code 20, 139 21, 140 22 specifies several forms of meaning, including dialogue and non-dialogue, announcement, express and implied. Combined with Article 10 of the Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Trial of Bills Dispute Cases 23 stipulates the evidence that should be submitted when the payer or acceptor is declared bankrupt by the court according to law and the holder brings a lawsuit to the court for exercising the right of recourse. According to the literal interpretation, "bringing a lawsuit to the court for exercising the right of recourse", that is, bringing a lawsuit to the court, is one of the forms in which the holder exercises the right of recourse. The holder may therefore exercise the right of recourse by way of action in court. This provision is formulated by the Supreme People's Court and is a judicial interpretation.
Finally, if offline recourse is considered invalid according to this article, the bearer of the paper bill can pursue it offline, but the bearer of the electronic commercial bill cannot pursue it offline. The two are essentially the same, but the scope of recourse is so different. And electronic commercial bills of exchange require online recourse, the essence is to facilitate the management of the People's Bank of China, but to some extent, the determination that offline recourse is invalid but limits the way in which the parties exercise their rights under the law (litigation is one of the ways in which the parties exercise their rights in the usual sense). Therefore, the author believes that offline recourse cannot be considered invalid according to Article 5 of the Measures for the Administration of Electronic Commercial Bill Business alone.
3. Whether notice of recourse is necessary for the exercise of recourse
The author believes that the notice of recourse is not a necessary condition for the exercise of the right of recourse.
Article 24 24 stipulates, the date of the electronic commercial bill of exchange recourse is the date on which the order of the recourse notice enters the electronic commercial bill of exchange system. That is, the Measures for the Administration of Electronic Commercial Bill of Exchange Business holds that sending a notice of recourse through the electronic commercial bill of exchange system is an act of recourse.
while the first paragraph of article 62 of chapter 2 "bill of exchange" section 6 "recourse" of the negotiable instruments law stipulates that the exercise of the right of recourse shall provide proof of refusal of acceptance or payment, the first and second paragraphs of Article 66 provide for the proof of refusal of acceptance or payment, and the holder of the bill of exchange may still exercise the right of recourse if it has not notified its forehand or the various debtors of the bill of exchange. That is, in the bill recourse under the Bill Law, notice is not a necessary condition for the exercise of recourse. Therefore, sending a notice of recourse through the electronic commercial bill of exchange system is not a necessary condition for the exercise of the right of recourse.
4. Whatever form of recourse is exercised by the holder, it does not affect the purpose of the establishment of the bill prescription system
the first paragraph of article 17 of the negotiable instruments law is about the limitation of bills, of which the third and fourth items are about the exercise period of recourse and re-recourse. There is currently controversy as to whether the statute of limitations on an instrument is a statute of limitations, a period of exclusion, or whether neither is a special provision for the duration of rights in the instrument law. Regardless of the nature of the statute of limitations of an instrument, the main purpose of the civil law provisions on the period for the exercise of rights such as the statute of limitations is to urge the parties to exercise their rights & mdash;& mdash; not to protect those who sleep on their rights and to maintain the stability of the transaction. The Bill Law requires recourse within a certain period of time, in addition to the aforementioned purpose, but also to ensure that all parties know the current state of the bill, so as not to pay off by mistake, or lead to their own rights and obligations in a long-term uncertain state. Therefore, on this basis, no matter what form the holder exercises the right, it does not affect the achievement of the above-mentioned purpose. However, if the recourse method is restricted, the exercise of power will be restricted, which will lead to the prosecution to the court within the limitation period without obtaining the effect of safeguarding rights, thus putting the cart before the horse.
. The electronic commercial bill of exchange system may not be able to conduct online recourse due to system failure or setup reasons. Therefore, it cannot be ruled out that the parties use litigation to remedy them.
according to the current actual situation in China, a large number of personnel who have obtained the bill processing authority, non-professionals, have limited cognition of bills, and the actual operation process of bill recourse is not uniform (after the author consulted Shanghai bill exchange on January 4, 2024, knowing that such as online recourse, it is necessary to carry out corresponding operations according to the requirements of different banks), which also increases the difficulty of practical operation for the parties. In practice, there are also electronic commercial bill of exchange system failure or set-up reasons, has met the online recourse conditions and can not operate on the system, at this time, can not rule out the parties to use litigation to its relief.
6. The electronic commercial bill of exchange system can change the bill information according to the court decision
after consulting the Shanghai bill exchange on January 4, 2024, the author learned that when the parties are unable to change the holder through the electronic commercial bill system, they can submit an application to the Shanghai bill exchange for changing the business of the bill holder through the effective judgment of the holding court, the Shanghai Bill Exchange will handle changes in bill information in accordance with court decisions.
The formulation of laws and regulations usually has a certain lag. It is true that more and more electronic commercial bills of exchange have appeared, and fewer and fewer subjects choose paper bills of exchange. The use of electronic commercial bills of exchange may be a major trend in the future. If the provisions of Article 5 of the Measures for the Administration of Electronic Commercial Bills of Exchange can be adopted to standardize and guide the business form of electronic commercial bills of exchange, it will greatly improve the circulation rate of electronic commercial bills of exchange and facilitate supervision. Therefore, in the future, after the development of electronic commercial bills of exchange is becoming more and more mature, the operation of the electronic commercial bill of exchange system is more standardized and convenient, and citizens are more familiar with and familiar with the use of the electronic commercial bill of exchange system, it is still not ruled out that the provisions of Article 5 of the measures for the administration of electronic commercial bills of exchange business are revised by the negotiable instruments law, or are truly applicable in other ways.
of course, the current situation is that, as mentioned above, there is still a big dispute about the effectiveness of offline recourse of electronic commercial bills of exchange. Therefore, the author suggests to combine the provisions of article 26 of the the People's Republic of China civil procedure law (2023 amendment) 25, article 6 of the provisions of the supreme people's court on several issues concerning the trial of bill dispute cases, etc., according to the specific circumstances of the bill, try to retrieve local precedents within the optional range, determine the competent court. Of course, also because there are different precedents in different courts, it is still recommended in practice to try to within the statute of limitations of the bill, while taking online recourse to the opposite party, so as not to lose the case due to different court determinations.
in addition, there are some difficulties in the practical operation of synchronizing offline recourse information to the electronic commercial bill system. fortunately, judging from the consultation results of the Shanghai bill exchange, there is already a feasible operation to change the bill holder according to the court's judgment.
It has been almost four years since September 2020. My team boss, lawyer Chen Zhimin and lawyer Li Wei, are very senior and professional lawyers. They have been working in the lawyer industry for more than 30 years and are my guides and guides. For the completion of this article, I thank lawyer Chen Zhimin for helping to determine the topic, lawyer Chen Zhimin and lawyer Li Wei for their adjustment and suggestions on the structure and content of the article, lawyer Zhu Huihui, my editor in "Sheng Dian Lawyer Review" for his suggestions on the structure of the article, and lawyer Zhou Hairong, editor-in-chief of "Sheng Dian Lawyer Review" for his affirmation, which gave me more confidence in the publication of this article.
Thank you.
Attorney Zhou Ning
[brief introduction to practice] secretary general of sheng dian's civil and commercial dispute resolution legal professional committee. Graduated from Zhongnan University of Economics and Law, majoring in law, is currently mainly engaged in civil and commercial litigation, non-litigation legal business. During his career, he served many legal advisory units and handled many civil and commercial disputes.
[practice area] legal services such as civil contract litigation, corporate legal counsel, commercial litigation and arbitration.
Contacts
Tel: 18823422364 (same WeChat number)
Email: zhouning@shengdian.com.cn
Notes:
1. article 62 of the provisions of the supreme people's court on several issues concerning the trial of bill dispute cases (amended in 2020) stipulates: "the people's court hears bill dispute cases, the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Law shall apply; where there are no provisions in the Negotiable Instruments Law, laws such as the the People's Republic of China Civil Code and administrative regulations formulated by the State Council shall apply. If the relevant administrative rules and regulations formulated and promulgated by the people's Bank of China do not conflict with laws and administrative regulations, they may be applied by reference."
2. article 5 of the "measures for the administration of electronic commercial bill business" stipulates: "electronic commercial bill business such as drawing, acceptance, endorsement, guarantee, prompt payment and recourse, it must be done through the electronic commercial bill of exchange system."
3. article 66 of the "measures for the administration of electronic commercial bill business" stipulates: "if the bearer is refused payment before the maturity date of the bill, he shall not refuse payment recourse. If the holder is refused payment during the prompt payment period, he may recover the refusal of payment from all previous hands. If the holder is refused payment beyond the prompt payment period, if the holder has issued a prompt payment during the prompt payment period, the holder may refuse to pay the recourse to all forehands; if the prompt payment has not been issued during the prompt payment period, the holder may only refuse to pay the recourse to the drawer and the acceptor."
4. Article 67 of the Measures for the Administration of Electronic Commercial Bill Business stipulates: "When recourse is made, the claimant shall provide proof of refusal to pay. In the event of a claim for refusal of payment, the proof of refusal of payment is the information on the instrument and the reason for refusal of payment. In the case of non-repudiation recourse, the proof of repudiation is the bill information and relevant legal documents."
5. article 4 of the "the People's Republic of China bill law" stipulates: "when making a bill, the bill drawer shall sign the bill in accordance with the legal conditions and bear the responsibility. The matters recorded. When the holder exercises the right of the bill, he shall sign the bill in accordance with the legal procedure and present the bill. If the debtor of other instruments signs the instrument, he shall be liable for the instrument in accordance with the matters recorded in the instrument."
6. article 14 of the measures for the administration of electronic commercial bill business stipulates: "the signature of the party to the bill on the electronic commercial bill is the reliable electronic signature. The authentication services required for electronic signatures should be provided by legitimate electronic authentication service providers. Reliable electronic signatures must comply with the provisions of Article 13, paragraph 1, of the the People's Republic of China Law on Electronic Signatures."
7. Zhao Cila: Application and Analysis of Electronic Commercial Bill Regulation in Judicial Adjudication. Shanghai Finance, No. 9, 2021
& nbsp; On January 4, 2024, after the author consulted the Shanghai Stock Exchange, the Shanghai Stock Exchange has launched two systems on the bill business; electronic Commercial Bill of Exchange System (ECDS), China Bill Business System. ECDS will cease its external services on July 27, 2024, after which it will be uniformly managed by the China Bill Business System.
8. Article 3, paragraph 2, of the Measures for the Administration of Electronic Commercial Bill System stipulates: "The registration, circulation and settlement of electronic commercial bills of exchange must be handled through relevant systems such as the electronic commercial bill of exchange system of the Shanghai Bill Exchange." Article 3 of the Measures for the Administration of Acceptance, Discounting and Rediscounting of Commercial Bills of Exchange stipulates:
"endorsement, pledge, guarantee, prompt payment and recourse before issuing, accepting, discounting, electronic commercial bills, it should be handled through the bill market infrastructure recognized by the People's Bank of China. Supply chain bills are electronic commercial bills of exchange."
For convenience of description, the author refers to ECDS and China Bill Business System as "Electronic Commercial Bill System.
9. According to the "People's Bank of China on Revising & lt; Measures for the Administration of Electronic Commercial Bill System" issued by the People's Bank of China on June 4, 2018 & gt; the People's Bank of China has transferred the electronic commercial bill of exchange system to Shanghai Bill Exchange Co., Ltd. for operation on October 7, 2017.
10. see & nbsp;(2021) yue 1971 min Chu 27544 "civil judgment", China referee p
11.B, c see (2020) yue 03 min zong 20972 "civil judgment", China document network
12. article 61 of the bill of exchange law stipulates: "if payment is refused upon maturity, the bearer may exercise the right of recourse against the endorser, the drawer and other debtors of the bill of exchange. Before the maturity date of the bill of exchange, the holder may also exercise the right of recourse under any of the following circumstances: (1) the bill of exchange is refused acceptance; the (II) acceptor or payer dies or escapes; the (III) acceptor or payer is declared bankrupt according to law or is ordered to terminate its business activities for violating the law."
13. article 62 of the negotiable instruments law stipulates: "when exercising the right of recourse, the bearer shall provide relevant proof of refusal of acceptance or refusal of payment.
If the bearer prompts acceptance or prompts that the payment is rejected, the acceptor or payer must issue a rejection certificate or a refund reason letter. If a certificate of refusal or a letter of reasons for refund is not issued, the civil liability arising therefrom shall be borne."
14. article 68 of the negotiable instruments law stipulates: "the drawer, endorser, acceptor and guarantor of a bill of exchange shall be jointly and severally liable to the bearer.
The bearer may exercise recourse against any one, several or all of the debtors of the bill of exchange, out of order.
If the holder has recourse against one or more of the debtors of the bill of exchange, he may still exercise recourse against the other debtors of the bill of exchange. After the person against whom the claim is made has paid off the debt, he has the same rights as the holder of the ticket."
15. article 17 of the negotiable instruments law stipulates: "the bill rights shall be extinguished without exercise within the following time limits: (1) the bearer's rights to the bill shall be drawn and the bill cashier, two years from the maturity of the notes. See pay-as-you-go bills and promissory notes, two years from the date of issue; (II) the holder's rights against the cheque drawer, six months from the date of issue; (III) the holder's recourse against the forehand, six months from the date of refusal of acceptance or refusal of payment; (IV) the holder's re-recourse against the forehand, three months from the date of liquidation or the date of prosecution."
16. Article 4 of the Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Trial of Bills Dispute Cases stipulates: "If the holder does not first exercise the right to request payment and first exercises the right of recourse and is refused to file a lawsuit, the people's court shall not accept it. Except in the circumstances set out in article 61, paragraph 2, of the Notes Act and article 3 of this provision, the holder may exercise the right of recourse only if it first exercises the right to request payment from the payer and fails to pay."
17. article 109 of the negotiable instruments law stipulates: "the specific implementation measures for the administration of bills shall be formulated by the people's bank of China in accordance with this law and submitted to the state Council for approval before implementation."
18. the first and second paragraphs of article 66 of the negotiable instruments law stipulate: "the bearer shall receive the relevant certificate within three days from the date of rejection of acceptance or rejection of payment, the prior party shall notify the prior party in writing of the reasons for the rejection; the prior party shall notify the prior party in writing within three days from the date of receipt of the notice. The holder may also give written notice to each debtor of the bill of exchange at the same time.
The holder may still exercise the right of recourse if the notice is not given within the period specified in the preceding paragraph. If a loss is caused to his forehand or the drawer as a result of the extension of notice, the party to the bill of exchange that fails to notify within the prescribed time limit shall be liable for the loss, but the amount of compensation shall be limited to the amount of the bill of exchange."
19. the second paragraph of article 91 of the the People's Republic of China legislation law stipulates: "matters stipulated in departmental rules shall belong to matters for the implementation of laws or administrative regulations, decisions and orders of the state Council. Without the basis of laws or administrative regulations, decisions and orders of the State Council, departmental rules shall not set norms that detract from the rights or increase the obligations of citizens, legal persons and other organizations, nor shall they increase the powers of their departments or reduce the statutory duties of their departments."
20. article 137 of the civil code stipulates: "an expression of meaning made by dialogue shall take effect when the relative person knows its content.
21. article 139 of the civil code stipulates: "an expression of meaning made by public announcement shall take effect when the public announcement is issued."
22. article 140 of the civil code stipulates: "the actor may express or impliedly express his intention."
23. article 10 of the provisions of the supreme people's court on several issues concerning the trial of bill dispute cases stipulates: "if the payer or the acceptor is declared bankrupt by the people's court according to law, when the holder brings a lawsuit in a people's court for exercising the right of recourse, he shall provide the accepting court with a ruling on the declaration of bankruptcy made by the people's court in accordance with the law or other evidence that can prove the bankruptcy of the payer or acceptor."
24. article 24 of the measures for the administration of electronic commercial bill business stipulates: "the date of drawing an electronic commercial bill of exchange refers to the date on which the drawer records the bill of exchange. The prompt payment date of an electronic commercial bill of exchange is the date on which the order prompting the payment application enters the electronic commercial bill of exchange system. The date of refusal of payment for an electronic commercial bill of exchange is the date on which an order to reject a request for payment is entered into the electronic commercial bill of exchange system. The date of the electronic commercial bill of exchange recourse is the date on which the order of the recourse notice enters the electronic commercial bill of exchange system. The date of acceptance, endorsement, guarantee, pledge release, payment and recourse settlement refers to the date on which the corresponding receipt order enters the electronic commercial bill of exchange system."
25. article 26 of the the People's Republic of China civil procedure law (2023 amendment) stipulates: "a lawsuit brought over a bill dispute shall be under the jurisdiction of the people's court of the place where the bill is paid or the defendant's domicile."
