无单放货的举证责任问题

（一）   、无单放货的举证责任承担

对于无单放货举证责任的承担，在实践中存在两种较为对立的观点，一种观点认为，根据我国民诉法“谁主张，谁举证”的基本举证原则，应当由主张无单放货事实和损失的一方承担举证责任，并承担举证不能的法律后果；而一种观点认为，无单放货的举证责任应当特殊情况特殊对待，考虑到违约方更加了解货物的情况，其举证能力大大优于提单权利人，故应当由实施无单放货的违约方就无单放货的事实承担举证责任，如其否认无单放货，就应证明货物尚在其控制之下。持第二种观点的法律依据为《证据规定》第七条的规定“在法律没有具体规定，依本规定及其他司法解释无法确定举证责任承担时，人民法院可以依据公平原则和诚实信用原则，综合当事人举证能力等因素确定举证责任的承担”。作者认为第二种观点是不可取的，首先，该种观点认为违约人的举证能力当然优于提单权利人忽视了个案的特殊性，其考量缺乏细致、全面；其次，举证能力只是该条规定适用的一个方面，其前提是法律没有明确规定举证责任承担方可适用，而相关法律、司法解释已经明确确定了无单放货的举证责任，适用该条规定事实上让违约人承担举证责任倒置的后果，有违民诉法及《证据规定》的规定和精神。                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        

（二）   、无单放货的证明事项和要求

根据我国法律规定和司法实践，不论是基于违约还是侵权向承运人提起的无单放货诉讼，提单权利人一般要证明如下事项：

1、原告是正本提单的合法持有人

原告应向法院提交三份正本提单，如果原告并非提单上载明的托运人，应当证明该提单系经过正常流转程序获得，即来源合法。

2、被告实施无单放货的事实

根据案件具体情况，原告一般可以通过如下途径证明，如货代、船代确认的货物已被提走的信函、传真、电子邮件，从网上打印的集装箱动态信息或原告前往目的港提货不着的证据等。在这一点上，笔者认为应当考虑前述第二种观点的合理因素，只要原告提出无单放货的初步证据，相关举证责任即转移至被告。

3、被告实施无单放货给原告造成的损失

原告应当向法院提交商业发票、报关单、贸易合同、核销单等以确定原告的实际损失，须特别说明的是，鉴于我国特殊的外汇管制制度，如果涉案货款已经滚动核销的，就会面临非常被动的局面，对该问题下文单列论及。

4、原告的损失与被告的无单放货行为存在因果关系。

（三）、外汇总量核销时的损失举证问题

案例：国内h公司与新加坡某公司签订贸易合同，出口一批货物，并通过货运代理人委托承运人出运，后该批货物在目的港无单放货，h公司将承运人诉至法院后，承运人抗辩认为h公司涉案货款已经核销，没有受到损失，法院审理后认为，h公司已经办理涉案货款的核销手续，已经收到涉案货款，故驳回了h公司的诉讼请求。

此类案例并不少见，发生该案的原因是我国特殊的外汇管制、核销制度，该制度要求外汇管理局以出口货物价值为标准核对是否有相应外汇收回国内的一种制度，在实践中核销分为两种方式一种为逐笔核销，要求出口商对每笔货款进行一一对应，此种情况下，一般不会发生前述争议；另一种核销方式为总量核销，这种核销方式下并不需要货款与每一笔贸易一一对应，只要总量一致就可以了，这样就会造成涉案货款虽然核销，但涉案货款并未收回的情形，而法院根据国家机关出具的证明力较高的文书，则会做出涉案货款已经收回的判例。法院的这种做法备受争议，后来法院逐步认识到这种做法的不合理性，在当事人提出足够证据证明核销货款并未收回的情况下，可以推翻国家机关出具的文书，司法实践中，货主需证明如下事项：

1、用于核销涉案贸易合同货款的案外出口贸易合同；

2、案外出口贸易合同的国外买方支付货款的凭证；

3、尚未核销的案外出口贸易合同对应的出口收汇核销单；

4、出口企业未对涉案货款办理过退税的证明，或国外买方提供的表明未支付过涉案货款的声明书。

虽然司法实践改变了过去一刀切的方式，但这无疑大大加重了货主的举证责任。