本文選題：強(qiáng)制性法規(guī) + 違法內(nèi)容��； 參考：《華東政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)》2017年01期

【摘要】：強(qiáng)制性法規(guī),有多種類型。合同違反不同類型的強(qiáng)制性法規(guī),其效力各異。故理論上應(yīng)先區(qū)分不同類型的強(qiáng)制性法規(guī),再分別考察合同違反此等法規(guī)的效力。瑞士學(xué)界和司法界認(rèn)為,強(qiáng)制性法規(guī)有公法上的和私法上的兩種。公法上法規(guī),多為強(qiáng)制性,其理論重點(diǎn)不在此等法規(guī)強(qiáng)制性的識(shí)別上,而在合同違反此等法規(guī)的效力上。私法上法規(guī)多不具強(qiáng)制性,故此等法規(guī)強(qiáng)制性的認(rèn)定為重點(diǎn)之一,違反此等強(qiáng)制性法規(guī)的合同效力為重點(diǎn)之二。借助審判實(shí)踐,違反強(qiáng)制性法規(guī)的合同效力在瑞士法上得到一定程度的類型化。
[Abstract]:There are many types of mandatory regulations. Contracts violate different types of mandatory regulations and have different effects. Therefore, in theory, different types of mandatory laws and regulations should be distinguished, and then the validity of breach of these regulations should be investigated separately. The Swiss academic and judicial circles believe that there are two kinds of peremptory legislation: public law and private law. Laws and regulations in public law are mostly mandatory. The theoretical emphasis is not on the mandatory identification of these regulations, but on the validity of the breach of these laws by contract. Most laws and regulations in private law are not mandatory, so the mandatory recognition of these laws and regulations is one of the key points, and the second is the contract effectiveness of violating these mandatory laws and regulations. With the help of trial practice, the validity of contract in violation of compulsory laws and regulations has been classified to a certain extent in Swiss law.
【作者單位】： 瑞士弗里堡大學(xué)法學(xué)院;
【基金】：國(guó)家社科基金一般項(xiàng)目“電子支付民事法律問(wèn)題研究”(項(xiàng)目號(hào)14BFX164)的階段性研究成果 留學(xué)基金委留學(xué)基金資助
【分類號(hào)】：DD913;D952.2

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 夏峰;;銀行卡跨行收費(fèi)不違反強(qiáng)制性法規(guī)[J];金融博覽;2006年06期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前1條

1 本報(bào)記者 王斌;“停車超3分鐘熄火”或成強(qiáng)制性法規(guī)[N];法制日?qǐng)?bào);2013年

，

本文編號(hào)：1863646