海南大学学报(社会科学版)

就债权多重转让中的权利归属，我国《民法典》并未作出规定，现有研究存在三种主要观点，分别为“让与主义”之“先来后到”规则、“通知优先”规则、“登记优先”规则。《最高人民法院关于适用〈中华人民共和国民法典〉合同编通则若干问题的解释》（下简称《合同编通则司法解释》）第50条针对债权多重转让这一问题，选择并确立了以债权让与通知的先后顺序来决定债权归属的“通知优先”规则。在规范内容上，《合同编通则司法解释》第50条明确了债务人按照通知先后履行债务即可免除付款责任的“债务人履行规则”、最先通知或者实质上接受履行的受让人利益应予保护的“受让人权利保护规则”以及根据债权让与通知发出主体和形式判断债权让与通知到达时间的“债权让与通知时间查明规则”。在规则适用上，《合同编通则司法解释》第50条并未限定适用于该条的债权类别与范围，除普通债权多重转让可直接适用该条外，本质上以债权转让为核心的保理应收账款多重转让也可以准用《合同编通则司法解释》第50条的相关规则；但当“普通债权+保理应收账款”共存时，无论是参照适用《合同编通则司法解释》第50条“通知优先”规则还是依据《担保制度司法解释》第66条之规定参照适用《民法典》第768条均存在理论窒碍与实践困境，此时应从债权转让逻辑、交易成本衡量和风险防范等角度考量“让与主义”之“先来后到”规则的可适用性。

Regarding the ownership of rights in the multiple assignment of claims, the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China does not make any provisions. There are currently three main viewpoints in existing research, which are the "first come, first served" rule of "assignment" orientation, the "notification priority" rule, and the "registration priority" rule. Article 50 of Interpretations of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the General Provisions of the Contract Section of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China selects and establishes the "notification priority" rule, which determines the ownership of claims based on the order of the notifications for the assignment of claims. In terms of the normative contents, Article 50 of Interpretations of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the General Provisions of the Contract Section of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China clarifies the "rule for the performance of a debtor" that the debtor may be exempted from the payment liability by performing debts in the order of the notices received, the "protection rule for the assignee' rights" that the interests of the assignee who first gives notice or actually accepts performance should be protected, and the "rule for ascertaining the time of the claims-assigning notice" that determines the time of arrival of the notice based on the subject and form of issuing the claims-assigning notices. In terms of the application of the rules, Article 50 of Interpretations of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the General Provisions of the Contract Section of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China does not limit the category and scope of claims applicable to this article. Not only can the multiple assignment of ordinary claims directly apply to this article, but the multiple transfer of factoring accounts receivable with the assignment of claims as the core can essentially apply to the relevant rules of Article 50. However, when "ordinary claims and factoring accounts receivable" coexist, there are the theoretical obstacles and practical difficulties no matter whether it refers to the "notification priority" rule applicable to Article 50 of Interpretations of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Contract Section of the General Provisions of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China or Article 768 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China as stipulated in the provisions of Article 66 of Interpretations of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Guarantee System under the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China. In this regard, the applicability of the "first come, first served" rule should be considered from the perspective of the claims-assigning logic, transaction cost measurement and risk prevention.