本文選題：司法拍賣 + 網(wǎng)絡(luò)拍賣�。� 參考：《華東政法大學(xué)》2016年碩士論文

【摘要】：司法拍賣作為強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行程序中的重要變價(jià)方式,是我國(guó)執(zhí)行制度中的重要組成部分。司法拍賣制度的執(zhí)行情況對(duì)我國(guó)司法權(quán)威的樹(shù)立、司法公信力的提升意義重大。但實(shí)踐中,相關(guān)法律規(guī)則的缺失以及司法拍賣理論研究的不深入,進(jìn)一步造成了司法拍賣不盡如人意的運(yùn)行狀況。委托拍賣方式不僅沒(méi)有達(dá)到預(yù)想中加強(qiáng)監(jiān)督法院拍賣行為的效果,反而使法院和拍賣機(jī)構(gòu)聯(lián)合尋租,司法腐敗現(xiàn)象嚴(yán)重;加上委托拍賣方式下拍賣信息公開(kāi)化程度不夠、惡意串標(biāo)、圍標(biāo)頻繁,都使得我國(guó)司法拍賣制度面臨重重困難,社會(huì)評(píng)價(jià)度不高。于是,呼吁改革司法拍賣制度的聲音不斷高漲。隨著網(wǎng)絡(luò)技術(shù)的發(fā)展,各地法院開(kāi)始了司法拍賣改革的探索,通過(guò)多方主體參與司法拍賣來(lái)制衡司法拍賣各主體之間的關(guān)系,并利用網(wǎng)絡(luò)技術(shù)對(duì)司法拍賣進(jìn)行規(guī)制,形成了富有代表意義的上海公共資源拍賣中心模式、重慶聯(lián)合產(chǎn)權(quán)交易所模式以及浙江淘寶司法拍賣模式,一場(chǎng)重振司法拍賣的大變革正在蓬勃發(fā)展中。實(shí)踐中的變革也推動(dòng)了立法做出相應(yīng)的變革,2015年2月起施行的《最高人民法院關(guān)于適用〈中華人民共和國(guó)民事訴訟法〉的解釋》(以下簡(jiǎn)稱《民訴法解釋》)明確規(guī)定法院既可以委托拍賣,又可以自行拍賣,1既肯定了委托拍賣方式的必要性,又確認(rèn)了浙江模式下的網(wǎng)絡(luò)自行拍賣的合法性。2016年1月1日新施行的《關(guān)于加強(qiáng)和規(guī)范人民法院網(wǎng)絡(luò)司法拍賣工作的意見(jiàn)》(以下簡(jiǎn)稱《網(wǎng)絡(luò)司法拍賣意見(jiàn)》)更是要求司法拍賣全面推行網(wǎng)上拍賣的方式,2并再次重申了委托拍賣的原則,3即網(wǎng)上拍賣方式應(yīng)全面運(yùn)用于委托拍賣和自行拍賣。在頻繁的變革措施下,我國(guó)司法拍賣今后將走向何方?這是我們需要研究的問(wèn)題。本文通過(guò)對(duì)司法拍賣改革浪潮下的多種司法拍賣模式進(jìn)行研究,在梳理我國(guó)司法拍賣制度演變歷程的基礎(chǔ)上,分析目前我國(guó)司法拍賣制度困境的癥結(jié),并結(jié)合當(dāng)前司法現(xiàn)狀與實(shí)證考察對(duì)我國(guó)司法拍賣出現(xiàn)的多種拍賣模式做了細(xì)致的分析與對(duì)比,最后從推進(jìn)委托拍賣與自行拍賣共同發(fā)展、完善人民法院訴訟資產(chǎn)網(wǎng)平臺(tái)、完善司法拍賣規(guī)則、強(qiáng)化司法拍賣監(jiān)督、提高司法拍賣成交率等角度提出筆者對(duì)深化我國(guó)司法拍賣改革的相關(guān)思索,為今后我國(guó)司法拍賣制度的發(fā)展和模式的選擇提供路徑指導(dǎo)。第一部分為司法拍賣制度的概述。首先,對(duì)司法拍賣的定義進(jìn)行明晰,其次,對(duì)司法拍賣的性質(zhì)進(jìn)行探討,分析關(guān)于司法拍賣性質(zhì)的各個(gè)學(xué)說(shuō),并在此基礎(chǔ)上提出筆者的認(rèn)識(shí)。最后,梳理司法拍賣的類型,為之后設(shè)計(jì)司法拍賣的不同模式做鋪墊。第二部分介紹我國(guó)司法拍賣制度的演變以及分析我國(guó)司法拍賣制度在實(shí)踐中面臨的困境和原因。從我國(guó)司法拍賣的歷史發(fā)展和實(shí)踐歷程角度回顧該制度的演變過(guò)程,并闡述了司法拍賣制度在我國(guó)司法實(shí)踐中的現(xiàn)狀和困境,分析了造成現(xiàn)狀的癥結(jié)。第三部分為我國(guó)司法拍賣模式的實(shí)證分析,對(duì)上海公共資源拍賣中心模式、重慶聯(lián)合產(chǎn)權(quán)交易所模式、浙江淘寶司法拍賣模式的優(yōu)勢(shì)和缺陷進(jìn)行分析,并結(jié)合實(shí)地考察,闡述這三個(gè)模式實(shí)施的實(shí)際效果。在此基礎(chǔ)上,第四部分對(duì)這三個(gè)模式進(jìn)行比較研究,探討了這三大模式的共同點(diǎn)和本質(zhì)差異,并深入分析了這三個(gè)模式共同反映的問(wèn)題,為第五部分完善我國(guó)司法拍賣相關(guān)建議的提出作鋪墊。第五部分為完善我國(guó)司法拍賣制度的相關(guān)思考,在對(duì)多種模式分析對(duì)比的基礎(chǔ)上,從推進(jìn)委托拍賣與自行拍賣共同發(fā)展、完善人民法院訴訟資產(chǎn)網(wǎng)平臺(tái)、完善司法拍賣規(guī)則、強(qiáng)化司法拍賣監(jiān)督、提高司法拍賣成交率角度對(duì)我國(guó)司法拍賣制度的完善提出一些建議,為重振司法拍賣公信力貢獻(xiàn)綿薄之力。
[Abstract]:The judicial auction is an important part of the enforcement procedure, which is an important part of our country's execution system. The implementation of the judicial auction system is of great significance to the establishment of our judicial authority and the promotion of judicial credibility. However, in practice, the lack of relevant legal rules and the lack of in-depth research on the theory of judicial auction are in depth. The auction has not only achieved the effect of strengthening the auction of the court in anticipation, but also makes the courts and auctioneer joint rent-seeking, the judicial corruption is serious, and the extent of the public auction is not enough, the malicious collusion is not enough, and the auction is frequent. As the system of judicial auction in China faces many difficulties and the social evaluation is not high, the voice of the call for the reform of the system of judicial auction is rising constantly. With the development of network technology, the courts of various places have begun to explore the reform of the judicial auction, and take part in the judicial auction to check the relationship between the various subjects of the judicial auction and make use of it. The network technology regulates the judicial auction, and forms a representative model of the Shanghai public resource auction center, the Chongqing joint property exchange model and the Zhejiang Taobao judicial auction model, and a great reform of the judicial auction is booming. The reform in practice has also promoted the corresponding changes in the legislation, 2015 The interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the application of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as the interpretation of the Civil Procedure Law) clearly stipulates that the court can both entrust an auction and auction it on its own. 1 not only affirms the necessity of the way of auction, but also recognised the legitimacy of the network auction under the Zhejiang model. The comments on strengthening and standardizing the network judicial auction of the people's court in January 1st (hereinafter referred to as < network judicial auction opinion >), which was implemented in January 1st,.2016 (hereinafter referred to as < network judicial auction opinion >) are more required for the full implementation of online auctions by judicial auction. 2 and reaffirming the principle of entrustment auction again, 3 that is, the online auction should be fully used for auction and self auction. Under the frequent change measures, where will our country's judicial auction be going? This is the question we need to study. This paper studies a variety of judicial auction models under the wave of judicial auction reform. On the basis of combing the evolution process of China's judicial auction system, this paper analyzes the crux of the plight of our judicial auction system. Combined with the current judicial status and empirical investigation, this paper makes a detailed analysis and comparison of various auction modes that appear in China's judicial auction, and finally from promoting the joint development of the entrust auction and the self auction, perfecting the platform of the people's court's litigation asset network, perfecting the judicial auction rules, strengthening the supervision of the judicial auction, and improving the judicial auction transaction rate. The author puts forward some thoughts on deepening the reform of judicial auction in China and provides a path guidance for the development of our judicial auction system and the choice of the mode. The first part is an overview of the judicial auction system. First, the definition of the judicial auction is clarified. Secondly, the nature of the judicial auction is discussed, and the judicial auction is analyzed. The second part introduces the evolution of China's judicial auction system and the analysis of the difficulties and reasons for the judicial auction system in our country. The evolution process of the system is reviewed in the perspective of historical development and practice, and the status and difficulties of the judicial auction system in the judicial practice in China are expounded. The crux of the present situation is analyzed. The third part is an empirical analysis of the mode of judicial auction in China, the mode of Shanghai public resource auction center and the joint property exchange model of Chongqing, The advantages and defects of the Zhejiang Taobao judicial auction model are analyzed, and the actual effects of the three models are expounded in the light of field investigation. On this basis, the fourth part makes a comparative study of the three models, discusses the common points and essential differences of the three models, and analyzes the problems reflected jointly by the three models. The fifth part is the paving for improving our country's judicial auction related proposals. The fifth part is to improve our judicial auction system. On the basis of the analysis and comparison of various models, we should promote the joint development of the commissioned auction and the self auction, perfect the platform of the people's court litigation asset network, perfect the judicial auction rules and strengthen the Department. The supervision of the law auction and the improvement of the rate of judicial auction have made some suggestions on the perfection of the judicial auction system in China, and contribute to the efforts to revive the credibility of the judicial auction.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2016
【分類號(hào)】：D925.1

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 丁軍;;網(wǎng)絡(luò)司法拍賣相關(guān)法律問(wèn)題探討[J];東方企業(yè)文化;2013年15期

2 徐舟;;推行司法網(wǎng)拍 提升司法公信——從法的價(jià)值角度證成網(wǎng)絡(luò)司法拍賣合理性[J];法制與社會(huì);2013年28期

3 喬曉;;重慶:司法拍賣進(jìn)入產(chǎn)權(quán)市場(chǎng)[J];產(chǎn)權(quán)導(dǎo)刊;2009年04期

4 朱薇;;重慶力破司法拍賣暴利鏈[J];w，

本文編號(hào)：2115348