摘要： “实际控制货物”的目的在于,将出质人支配与处分质押货物的自由,控制在不导致质权不能预期实现的范围内。占有状态与“实际控制货物”效果,不存在必然的因果关系。在债权人委托第三人监管货物时,债权人欲“实际控制货物”,需监管人实际履行约定的监管义务。监管人只在占有质押货物时才承担保管义务,否则只承担监管义务。依功能主义,不满足“实际控制货物”要求的动态质押交易,在符合浮动抵押的要件时,可成立浮动抵押。在动态质押未成立或无法全面实现时,应先确定各方当事人承担何种义务以及违反哪些义务,从而判断其承担的是补充责任、按份责任还是连带责任;再考量过错大小及是否存在免责事由,从而进一步明确各主体应承担的责任范围。

关键词: 动态质押, 实际控制货物, 占有, 监管协议, 监管义务

Abstract: The purpose of “actually control inventories” is to control the pledger's freedom to dominate and dispose of the pledged inventories within the risk range that does not lead to the unpredictable realization of the pledge. There is no certain causal relationship between the state of possession and the effect of “actually control inventories”. When the creditor entrusts a third party to supervise the goods, if the creditor wants to “actually control the goods”, the supervisor needs to actually perform the agreed supervision obligations. The supervisor only assumes the obligation of custody when it possesses the pledged inventories, otherwise he only assumes the obligation of supervision. According to functionalism, floating pledge transactions that do not meet the requirements of “actually control inventories” can establish a floating mortgage when the requirements of a floating mortgage are met. When the floating pledge is not established or cannot be fully realized, the parties should first determine what obligations the parties should bear and have violated, and how many faults they have, so as to initially determine whether the liability for compensation is supplementary liability, share liability or joint liability; then consider whether there are relevant exemptions, so as to further determine the scope of responsibility of each party.

Key words: Floating Pledge, Actually Control Inventories, Possession, Agreement of Supervision, Obligation of Supervision