我國締約過失責(zé)任賠償范圍研究
發(fā)布時間：2018-03-04 02:07
本文選題：締約過失責(zé)任 切入點：信賴?yán)?/strong> 出處：《華中科技大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文 論文類型：學(xué)位論文
【摘要】：締約過失責(zé)任制度是債法理論發(fā)展的一個重要體現(xiàn)，相比于其他制度形成較晚，被漢斯·德勒教授譽(yù)為“法學(xué)上的發(fā)現(xiàn)”。這項制度確認(rèn)了締約雙方因其締約行為產(chǎn)生的一種類契約的信賴關(guān)系，平衡了誠信原則與意思自由之間的矛盾，在經(jīng)濟(jì)活動中弘揚(yáng)誠實信用、保護(hù)交易安全起到了十分重要的作用。 我國1999年頒布出臺的《合同法》，其中第42條和第43條對締約過失責(zé)任制度作了專門的規(guī)定。但由于沒有具體的、具備可操作性的規(guī)定，致使在締約過失責(zé)任糾紛案件中，損害賠償?shù)姆秶粫r難以有定論。本文遂以對于理論、條文與案例的全面整理、比較和分析，進(jìn)行一些有說服力的討論。 筆者以為，締約過失責(zé)任是一種獨立的請求權(quán)。在這一點上，，它和違約責(zé)任、侵權(quán)責(zé)任相同，都是債的發(fā)生一種原因。其賠償?shù)膶ο蟪诵刨嚴(yán)�，固有利益同樣�?yīng)該納入締約過失責(zé)任保護(hù)客體的范圍內(nèi)。其中，對于信賴?yán)娴馁r償，應(yīng)當(dāng)同時包括直接利益損失與間接利益損失,所謂間接利益損失，主要是指機(jī)會利益損失。筆者同時認(rèn)為，對信賴?yán)娴馁r償應(yīng)進(jìn)行原則性的限制,即“最高不得超過履行利益，法律另有規(guī)定的除外”。所謂另有規(guī)定，主要針對“締約過程中締約方遭受人身、財產(chǎn)等固有利益損害”以及“在加害人存在欺詐、惡意等特殊情況下，法律規(guī)定受害人可以獲得懲罰性賠償”的情況以及其他法律明文規(guī)定有懲罰性賠償?shù)那闆r。
[Abstract]:The system of fault liability in contracting is an important embodiment of the development of the theory of debt law, which is later formed than other systems. What Professor Hance Deller called a "discovery in law," a system that confirmed the trust of a type of contract between the contracting parties as a result of their contracting actions, and balanced the contradiction between the principle of good faith and the freedom of will. Promoting honesty and credit in economic activities and protecting transaction security have played a very important role. In 1999, the contract Law was promulgated in China, in which articles 42 and 43 made special provisions on the system of fault liability in contracting. However, due to the lack of specific and operable provisions, it has resulted in disputes over fault liability in contracting cases. The scope of compensation for damages is difficult to come to a conclusion. This paper makes some persuasive discussions on the comprehensive arrangement, comparison and analysis of theories, articles and cases. The author thinks that the liability for fault in contracting is an independent right of claim. At this point, it is the same as the liability for breach of contract and the liability for tort, which is a reason for the occurrence of the debt. The inherent interests should also be included in the scope of the object of protection of the fault liability in contracting. The compensation for the trust interest should include both direct and indirect loss of interest, so called indirect interest loss, At the same time, the author believes that compensation for reliance interests should be restricted in principle, that is, "the maximum amount shall not exceed the performing interest, unless otherwise provided by law". Focusing on "the parties suffered damage to the inherent interests of persons, property, etc. In the course of contracting" and "in exceptional circumstances such as fraud and malice on the part of the perpetrator," The law provides for punitive damages for victims, as well as for cases where punitive damages are expressly provided for in other laws.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華中科技大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號】：D923.6
【參考文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前3條
1 冉克平;;締約過失責(zé)任性質(zhì)新論——以德國學(xué)說與判例的變遷為視角[J];河北法學(xué);2010年02期
2 崔建遠(yuǎn);締約上過失責(zé)任論[J];吉林大學(xué)社會科學(xué)學(xué)報;1992年03期
3 朱巖;;違反保護(hù)他人法律的過錯責(zé)任[J];法學(xué)研究;2011年02期
本文編號：1563656
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/hetongqiyue/1563656.html
