2010注冊會計(jì)師《經(jīng)濟(jì)法》沖刺實(shí)驗(yàn)?zāi)�擬試題(1)

　　2.

　　【正確答案】：(1)A、B兩個(gè)企業(yè)簽訂的買賣合同有效。根據(jù)《合同法》的有關(guān)規(guī)定，法人的法人代表人超越權(quán)限訂立的合同(包括擔(dān)保合同)，除相對人知道或者應(yīng)當(dāng)知道其超越權(quán)限的以外，該代表行為有效，合同成立有效。在本案中，B企業(yè)并不知道A企業(yè)的法定代表人張某超越了內(nèi)部權(quán)限，因此張某的代表行為有效，買賣合同成立有效。

　　(1) The sales contract signed by Company A and B is valid. According to the Contract Law, where the legal representative or the person-in-charge of a legal person or an organization of any other nature entered into a contract acting beyond his scope of authority, unless the other party knew or should have known that he was acting beyond his scope of authority, such act of representation is valid. In this case, Company B didn't know Mr. Zhang, Company A's legal representative, was acting beyond his scope of authority. So Mr. Zhang's act of representation is valid. The sales contract is valid.

　　(2)A企業(yè)有權(quán)在6月5日行使不安抗辯權(quán)，中止履行合同。根據(jù)《合同法》的有關(guān)規(guī)定，應(yīng)當(dāng)先履行債務(wù)的當(dāng)事人，有確切證據(jù)證明對方經(jīng)營狀況嚴(yán)重惡化的，可以中止履行，要求對方提供擔(dān)保。

　　(2) Company A has the right to exercise the right of unassured pleadings, and stop fulfilling the contract. According to the Contract Law, the party required to perform first may suspend its performance if it has the conclusive evidence establishing that the other party's business has seriously deteriorated, and demand the other party provide appropriate assurance.

　　(3)A、B兩個(gè)企業(yè)簽訂的抵押合同有效，但雙方在抵押合同中“如B企業(yè)不能支付到期貨款，該廠房的所有權(quán)直接歸A企業(yè)所有”的約定無效。根據(jù)規(guī)定，抵押人和抵押權(quán)人在合同中不得約定在債務(wù)履行期限屆滿抵押權(quán)人未受清償時(shí)，抵押物的所有權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)移為債權(quán)人所有。但該約定內(nèi)容的無效不影響抵押合同其他部分內(nèi)容的效力。

　　(3) The mortgage contract signed by Company A and B is valid, but the statement that if Company B couldn't pay for the goods, the machine tools belonged to Company A is invalid. According to the Guaranty Law, the mortgagor and the mortgagee may not stipulate that the ownership of the mortgaged property shall be transferred to the creditor in case the mortgagee's claim is not satisfied after maturity of the debt. But this doesn't affect the validity of other parts.

　　(4)A企業(yè)與C企業(yè)的分支機(jī)構(gòu)甲簽訂的保證合同是有效的。根據(jù)規(guī)定，企業(yè)法人的分支機(jī)構(gòu)有法人書面授權(quán)的，可以在授權(quán)范圍內(nèi)提供保證。甲分支機(jī)構(gòu)已經(jīng)取得總公司C的書面授權(quán)書，因此有權(quán)對外提供保證。

　　(4) The guaranty contract signed by Company A and Jia, the branch of Company C, is valid. According to the regulations, if a branch of an enterprise as a legal person has a power of attorney from the legal person, it may provide a suretyship within the scope of authority. The branch Jia has the power of attorney from the Company C, so he can provide a suretyship.

　　(5)根據(jù)規(guī)定，保證人甲與債權(quán)人A未約定保證期間的，保證期間為主債務(wù)履行期屆滿之日起6個(gè)月。在本案中，主債務(wù)的履行期屆滿之日為7月10日，所以保證人C的保證期間為2009年7月10日～2010年1月10日。

　　(5) According to the regulations, if the surety Jia and the creditor A have no agreement on the term of suretyship, the term of suretyship shall be six months from the date of maturity of the principal debts. In this case, the date of maturity of the principal debts is July 10, so Company C’s term of suretyship is July 11, 2009 to January 11, 2010.

　　(6)B企業(yè)轉(zhuǎn)讓機(jī)床的行為是不符合《物權(quán)法》規(guī)定的。根據(jù)規(guī)定，在抵押期間，抵押人經(jīng)抵押權(quán)人同意轉(zhuǎn)讓抵押財(cái)產(chǎn)的，應(yīng)當(dāng)將轉(zhuǎn)讓所得價(jià)款向抵押權(quán)人提前清償債務(wù)或提存。在本題中，B企業(yè)并沒有經(jīng)過A公司同意便轉(zhuǎn)讓機(jī)床，而且也未將轉(zhuǎn)讓價(jià)款提前清償債務(wù)或提存，因此B的轉(zhuǎn)讓行為不符合法律規(guī)定。

　　(6) The action of Company B’s transferring machine tools isn’t in line with the Property Law. Where a mortgagor alienates, upon consent of the mortgagee, the mortgaged property during the mortgage term, the money generated from such alienation shall be used to pay off debts to the mortgagee in advance or be submitted to a competent authority for keeping. In this case, Company B alienated the machine tools, not having the consent of Company A, and the money generated from such alienation shall be used to pay off debts to the mortgagee in advance or be submitted to a competent authority for keeping, so B’s alienation is illegal.

　　(7)甲分支機(jī)構(gòu)拒絕履行保證責(zé)任的理由成立。根據(jù)規(guī)定，在合同約定的保證期間或者法律規(guī)定的保證期間，債權(quán)人未對債務(wù)人提起訴訟、申請裁定的(適用于一般保證)，或者未要求保證人承擔(dān)保證責(zé)任的(適用于連帶保證)，保證人免除保證責(zé)任。在本案中，甲分支機(jī)構(gòu)的保證期間為2009年7月10日～2010年1月10日。債權(quán)人A直到2010年6月1日才要求其承擔(dān)保證責(zé)任，已超出了保證期間，所以甲分支機(jī)構(gòu)的保證責(zé)任免除。

　　(7) The reason for Jia’s refusing to perform suretyship liability is reasonable. According to the regulations, where the creditor neither files a lawsuit against the debtor, applies for arbitration(applied to general suretyship), nor demand that the surety undertake suretyship liability(applied to suretyship of joint and several liability) during the term of suretyship agreed in the contract or provided by the law, the surety shall be relieved of the suretyship liability. In this case, Jia’s term of suretyship is July 11, 2009 to January 11, 2010. The creditor didn’t demand the surety undertake suretyship liability until June 1, 2010, beyond the term of suretyship, so Jia is relieved of the suretyship liability.