电子商业汇票期前提示付款的效力

Legal Effect of Presentment for Payment Prior to the Date Due of Electronic Commercial Draft

摘要: 合法的持票人固然可以行使(期前)提示付款的权利。相应的，承兑人也可以依法拒绝或自愿接受，法律对此没有理由亦无必要作出禁止性规定。但这不意味着所有的“期前提示付款”有效。相反，《票据法》第53条已经对法定提示付款期间作出明确规定，恰表明立法者对于“期前提示付款具有积极效力”的否定。在拒付追索情形下，若票据债务人并未自愿放弃期限利益，并未追认期前提示付款的效力，则应否认期前提示付款行为具有提示付款的积极效力，以保障数字金融安全，维护票据流通基础的票据无因性与要式性，保障汇票的流通性与可预期性。

Abstract: The lawful holder may exercise the right of presentment for payment prior to the date due. Simul-taneously, the acceptor may also refuse or accept voluntarily according to law, and there is no reason or necessity for the law to make prohibitive provisions. But that doesn’t mean all presentment is valid. On the contrary, Article 53 of the Negotiable Instruments Law of the People’s Republic of China has made explicit provisions on the period of statutory presentation for payment, which just shows that the legislator denies that “presentment for payment prior to the date due has positive effect”. In the case of recourse repudiation, if the debtor of the bill does not voluntarily give up the benefits of the deadline and does not have the effect of the presentment for payment before the ratification period, the positive effect of the presentment for payment before the deadline should be denied, so as to guarantee the digital financial security, maintain the non-causality and solemnity formal of the bill circulation basis, and guarantee the liquidity and predictability of the bill.