广东省江门市人民政府办公室


江府办［2008］75号





关于印发江门市市区废旧物资回收管理办法的通知



蓬江、江海、新会区人民政府，市直有关单位：

　　《江门市市区废旧物资回收管理办法》业经市政府十三届二十三次常务会议审议通过，现印发给你们，请认真执行。执行过程中遇到的问题，请径向市经贸局反映。



江门市人民政府办公室

二○○八年七月二十八日



江门市市区废旧物资回收管理办法



第一条　为促进废旧物资回收，规范废旧物资回收行业的发展，节约资源，保护环境，实现经济与社会可持续发展，根据商务部、发展改革委等六部委局《再生资源回收管理办法》和《广东省资源综合利用管理办法》等法规，结合本市实际，制定本办法。

第二条　本办法所称废旧物资，是指在社会生产和生活消费过程中产生的，已经失去原有全部或部分使用价值，经过回收、加工处理，能够使其重新获得使用价值的各种废弃物。

　废旧物资包括废旧金属、报废电子产品、报废机电设备及其零部件、废造纸原料（如废纸、废棉等）、废轻化工原料（如橡胶、塑料、农药包装物、动物杂骨、毛发等）、废玻璃等。

第三条　本办法所称“生产性废旧金属”，是指用于建筑、铁路、通讯、电力、水利、油田、市政设施及其他生产领域，已失去原有全部或部分使用价值的金属材料和金属制品。

第四条　在江门市市区从事废旧物资回收经营活动的企业和个体工商户（统称“废旧物资回收经营者”）应当遵守本办法。法律法规和规章对进口可用作原料的固体废物、危险废物、报废汽车的回收管理另有规定的，从其规定。

第五条　从事废旧物资回收经营活动，必须符合工商行政管理登记条件，领取营业执照后，方可从事经营活动。

　禁止个体经营者从事生产性废旧金属回收和加工业务。

第六条　从事废旧物资回收经营活动，应当在取得营业执照后30日内，按属地管理原则，向登记注册地工商行政管理部门的同级经贸部门或者其授权机构备案。

　备案事项发生变更时，废旧物资回收经营者应当自变更之日起30日内（属于工商登记事项的自工商登记变更之日起30日内）向经贸部门办理变更手续。

第七条　回收生产性废旧金属的废旧物资回收企业和回收非生产性废旧金属的废旧物资回收经营者，除应当按照本办法第六条规定向经贸部门备案外，还应当在取得营业执照后15日内，向所在地县级人民政府公安机关备案。

　备案事项发生变更时，前款所列废旧物资回收经营者应当自变更之日起15日内（属于工商登记事项的自工商登记变更之日起15日内）向县级人民政府公安机关办理变更手续。

第八条　生产企业应当通过与废旧物资回收企业签订收购合同的方式交售生产性废旧金属。收购合同中应当约定所回收生产性废旧金属的名称、数量、规格，回收期次，结算方式等。

第九条　废旧物资回收企业回收生产性废旧金属时，应当对物品的名称、数量、规格、新旧程度等如实进行登记。

　出售人为单位的，应当查验出售单位开具的证明，并如实登记出售单位名称、经办人姓名、住址、身份证号码；出售人为个人的，应当如实登记出售人的姓名、住址、身份证号码。

　登记资料保存期限不得少于2年。

第十条　废旧物资回收经营者在经营活动中发现有公安机关通报寻查的赃物或有赃物嫌疑的物品时，应当立即报告公安机关。公安机关对废旧物资回收经营者在经营活动中发现的赃物或有赃物嫌疑的物品应当依法予以扣押，并开列扣押清单。有赃物嫌疑的物品经查明不是赃物的，应当依法及时退还；经查明确属赃物的，依照国家有关规定处理。

第十一条　废旧物资的收集、储存、运输、处理等全过程应当遵守国家的相关污染防治标准、技术政策和技术规范。

第十二条　废旧物资回收经营者从事旧货收购、销售、储存、运输等经营活动应当遵守旧货流通的有关规定。

第十三条　废旧物资回收可以采取上门回收、流动回收、固定地点回收等方式。

　废旧物资回收经营者可以通过电话、互联网等形式与居民、企业建立信息互动，实现便民、快捷的回收服务。

第十四条　市区废旧物资回收实行集中经营，规范管理。集中经营场所的建设、经营和管理工作，按属地管理原则，由各区政府负责组织实施。

　各区政府应当按照统筹规划、合理布局的原则，根据本地经济发展水平、人口密度、环境和资源等具体情况，制定和实施本行政区域内废旧物资回收行业的相关规划和其他具体措施。

第十五条　经贸部门是废旧物资回收行业的行政主管部门，负责对该行业实施行业指导，引导行业健康发展。

　发展改革部门负责研究提出促进废旧物资回收行业发展的政策，组织实施废旧物资利用新技术、新设备的推广应用和产业化示范。〖JP〗

　规划部门负责将废旧物资回收行业集中经营用地纳入城市发展规划，并进行布局规划。

　国土资源部门负责对纳入规划的废旧物资回收经营用地进行功能调整，依照法定程序出让废旧物资回收经营所需用地。

　公安机关负责废旧物资回收的治安管理。

　工商行政管理部门负责废旧物资回收经营者的登记管理和废旧物资交易市场内的监督管理。

　环境保护行政管理部门负责对废旧物资回收过程中环境污染的防治工作实施监督管理，依法对违反污染环境防治法律法规的行为进行处罚。

　城市管理部门负责依法对废旧物资回收经营者占道经营、影响市容环境卫生的行为进行查处。

　建设、财政、卫生、税务、消防等职能部门按照各自的职责，积极协助，做好职权范围内废旧物资回收的监督管理工作。

　供销社是废旧物资回收行业业务主管部门，负责对废旧物资回收经营业务的管理、指导、协调；协助政府有关部门规范物资回收经营网点布局；牵头组织成立废旧物资回收行业协会，推行行业自律。　

部门职责由各区政府部门具体负责，市直有关部门参与和配合，各区政府没有设置的职能部门，其职责由市直有关部门履行。

第十六条　跨行政区域转移废旧物资进行储存、处置的，应当依照《中华人民共和国固体废物污染环境防治法》第二十三条的规定办理行政许可。

第十七条　废旧物资回收行业协会是行业自律性组织，履行如下职责：

　（一）反映企业的建议和要求，维护行业利益；

　（二）制定并监督执行行业自律性规范；

　（三）经法律法规授权或相关部门委托，进行行业统计、行业调查，发布行业信息。废旧物资回收行业协会应当接受相关部门的业务指导。

第十八条　未依法取得营业执照而擅自从事废旧物资回收经营业务的，由工商行政管理部门依照《无照经营查处取缔办法》予以处罚。

　凡超出工商行政管理部门核准的经营范围的，由工商行政管理部门按照有关规定予以处罚。

第十九条　违反本办法第六条规定，依据《再生资源回收管理办法》第二十一条由经贸部门给予警告，责令其限期改正；逾期拒不改正的，可视情节轻重，对废旧物资回收经营者处500元以上2000元以下罚款，并可向社会公告。

第二十条　违反本办法第七条规定，依据《再生资源回收管理办法》第二十二条由县级人民政府公安机关给予警告，责令其限期改正；逾期拒不改正的，可视情节轻重，对废旧物资回收经营者处500元以上2000元以下罚款，并可向社会公告。

第二十一条　废旧物资回收企业违反本办法第九条第一、二款规定，收购生产性废旧金属未如实进行登记的，由公安机关依据《废旧金属收购业治安管理办法》的有关规定予以处罚。

第二十二条　违反本办法第九条第三款规定，依据《再生资源回收管理办法》第二十四条的规定，由公安机关责令改正，并处500元以上1000元以下罚款。

第二十三条　违反本办法第十条规定，发现赃物或有赃物嫌疑的物品而未向公安机关报告的，依据《再生资源回收管理办法》第二十五条的规定，由公安机关给予警告，处500元以上1000元以下罚款；造成严重后果或屡教不改的，处以1000元以上5000元以下罚款。

第二十四条　有关行政管理部门工作人员严重失职、滥用职权、徇私舞弊、收受贿赂，侵害废旧物资回收经营者合法权益的，依据《再生资源回收管理办法》第二十六条的规定，有关主管部门应当视情节给予相应的行政处分；构成犯罪的，依法追究刑事责任。

第二十五条　本办法自公布之日起施行。


Expansion of Applicable Sphere: A way to Uniformity
——Compare and Contrast between UNIDROIT and UNCITRAL Conventions
By Dongsheng Lu, Chen Yan

I. Introduction

Financing is paramount for the promotion of commerce. It has been noted that “in developed countries the bulk of corporate wealth is locked up in receivables”. As the economy develops, this wealth increasing is “unlocked by transferring receivables across national borders”. With the prompt and great increases in international trade, receivables financing now plays a more and more important role. Yet under the law of many countries, certain forms of receivables financing are still not recognized. Even transactions are involved in countries where the form of receivables financing is permitted, determining which law governs will be difficult. The disparity among laws of different jurisdiction increases uncertainty in transactions, thus constitutes obstacles to the development of assignments of receivables. To remove such obstacles arising from the uncertainty existing in various legal systems and promote the development of receivables financing cross-boarder, a set of uniform rules in this field is required. The international community has made great efforts in adopting uniform laws. Among those efforts, the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) drafted, on 12 December, 2001, “United Nations Convention on the Assignment of Receivables in International Trade” (hereinafter referred to as the “UNCITRAL Convention”), with its aim to “establish principles and to adopt rules relating to the assignment of receivables that would create certainty and transparency and promote the modernization of the law relating to assignments of receivables”. UNCITRAL is not the first international organization attempting to resolve the problems associated with receivables. As early as in May 1988, the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT) has already adopted a convention known as the “UNIDROIT Convention on International Factoring” (hereinafter referred to as the “UNIDROIT Convention”).

When compare and contrast between the UNIDROIT Convention and the UNCITRAL Convention, one might see a lot of inconsistency in detailed regulations, e.g. sphere of application, relations between parties, priorities, and choice of law, etc. Given the limited space available in this article, the author may only focus on the difference in “sphere of application” of these two conventions, as sphere of application is perhaps the most fundamental issue of a convention.

The purpose of an international convention is to create uniformity in its covered matter, thus the broader a convention’s sphere of application is, the higher could uniformity reach. This article will try to make compare and contrast the sphere of application between the UNIDROIT Convention and the UNCITRAL Convention, illustrate the differences exist between these two conventions, and demonstrate the expansion of sphere of application in the UNCITRAL Convention and its progress on the way to uniformity.

II. Sphere of Application: Subject Matter

As its title indicates, the subject matter of the UNIDROIT Convention is of course international factoring. Article 1(1) says, “this Convention governs factoring contracts and assignments of receivables as described in this Chapter.”

For “factoring contract”, the UNIDROIT Convention provides the following 4 characteristics:

(1) purpose of the contract is to assign receivables;

(2) receivables to be assigned arises from contracts of sale of goods made between the supplier and its customers (debtors), other than those of sale of goods bought primarily for personal, family or household use;

(3) the factor is to perform at least two of the four functions: (i) finance for the supplier; (ii) maintenance of accounts (ledgering) relating to the receivables; (iii) collection of receivables; and (iv) protection against default in payment by debtors;

(4) notice of the assignment of the receivables is to be given to debtors.

As about “assignments of receivables as described in this Chapter”, article 2 (1) describes assignments of receivables as assignment of receivables pursuant to a factoring contract.

Factoring is just a subset of the receivables financing, and perhaps the oldest and most basic one. Besides factoring, receivables financing still entail the following forms,

(1) Forfeiting, similar to factoring, involves the purchase or discounting of documentary receivables (promissory notes, for example) without recourse to the party from whom the receivables are purchased;

(2) Refinancing, also known as secondary financing, involves the subsequent assignment of receivables. In its basic form, one bank or financier will assign to another bank its interest, with the potential for further assignment;

(3) Securitization, in which both marketable (for example, trade receivables) and non-marketable (consumer credit card receivables) asset cash flows are repackaged by a lender and transferred to a lender-controlled company, which will issue securities, sell and then use the proceeds to purchase the receivables;

(4) Project Finance, in which repayment of loans made by banks or financiers to project contractors for the financing of projects are secured through the future revenues of the project.

The first draft of the UNCITRAL Convention has stated to cover factoring, forfeiting, refinancing, securitization and project finance. Somehow, the working group decides that rather than emphasize the form in which the receivables appear, it would instead concentrate on the way in which the receivables might be transferred (contractual or non-contractual) and the purpose of the transaction (for financing or non-financing purposes). It decides the contractual receivables and assignment made to secure financing and other related services would be covered. The non-contractual receivables such as insurance and tort receivables, deposit bank accounts, or claims arising by operation of law seems are not within the ambits of the UNCITRAL convention.

III. Sphere of Application: Special Requirements

Both of the conventions contain a series of requirements. Only when those requirements are satisfied, could the convention be applied. The higher and stricter the requirements are, the smaller the chance to apply the convention is.

a) Internationality requirement

Both the two conventions indicate their sphere of application is of internationality requirement, but the same word in these two conventions has different legal meaning. The internationality requirement of UNIDROIT Convention is exclusively based upon the parties to the underlying contract, i.e. the contract of sale of goods (the supplier and the debtor) having their place of business in different countries. In other words, where the receivables arise from a contract of sale of goods between a supplier and a debtor whose places of business are in the same State, the UNIDROIT Convention could not apply, no matter the following assignment of receivables is to assignee in the same or different State. Thus leaving the international assignment of domestic receivables untouched. The problem, at its simplest, is twofold: first, inconsistency. For instance, in the case where a bulk assignment is made and where part of the receivables are domestic (supplier and debtor are in the same State) and part are international (supplier and debtor are in different State), if the supplier assigns the receivables to a party which is located in another State, the bulk assignment between the same supplier and the same assignee will be governed by two sets of laws and regulations: the portion of international receivables may be governed by the UNIDROIT Convention while the domestic one will be left to the jurisdiction of certain domestic law.

Secondly, leaving the international assignment of domestic receivables to the jurisdiction of various law systems of different States can make “commercial practice uncertain, time-consuming and expensive”. The assignee of receivables from a foreign State may not know which State’s law governs the transaction, and, if the law of the assignor’s State applies, the assignee’s rights would be subject to the vagaries of that foreign law. This no doubt would greatly impede the development of such transaction.