本文選題：自費出國留學(xué)　切入點：留學(xué)中介機(jī)構(gòu)　出處：《西南大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：文章第一部分對自費出國留學(xué)中介服務(wù)委托合同的特殊性和中介方違約責(zé)任的特殊性進(jìn)行了分析。由于自費出國留學(xué)中介服務(wù)委托合同存在當(dāng)事人之間信息不對等、履行效果與委托方協(xié)作密切相關(guān)和履行具有時效性和持續(xù)性的特殊性,因此中介方違約責(zé)任在認(rèn)定、承擔(dān)方式上與一般的違約責(zé)任具有差異。 在文章的第二部分自費出國留學(xué)中介服務(wù)委托合同中介方違約現(xiàn)狀考察中,筆者從北大法寶等法律數(shù)據(jù)庫里檢索收集到的現(xiàn)有的關(guān)于自費出國留學(xué)中介服務(wù)委托合同糾紛的十七份判決入手,將中介方的違約行為形態(tài)分為合同未按約定實際履行和退費問題,其中合同未按約定履行又被劃分為履行遲延、不完全履行和預(yù)期違約。從上述情況可以得出,在自費出國留學(xué)中介服務(wù)委托合同的履行產(chǎn)生的糾紛中,因中介方違約而訴諸法庭,中介方成為一審被告的情形居多。委托方在追究中介機(jī)構(gòu)的違約責(zé)任時面臨著舉證困難、歷時長、執(zhí)行困難的情況。 文章第三部分分析了造成中介方違約責(zé)任的根本原因在于經(jīng)濟(jì)利益的驅(qū)動和相關(guān)監(jiān)管配套制度的缺失,直接原因來自實踐中自費出國留學(xué)中介服務(wù)委托合同中格式條款的大量采用,即違約責(zé)任條款減免中介方責(zé)任,鮮有違約金的約定；退費條款侵害委托方利益,退費手續(xù)規(guī)定復(fù)雜過于苛刻；對獎學(xué)金條款約定不合理,同時少有留學(xué)中介無法達(dá)成合同目的時約定繼續(xù)履行的補救方法。除此之外,還有一些其他如中介機(jī)構(gòu)收取滯納金的不合理規(guī)定。 針對上述問題,文章在第四部分在無需有名化自費出國留學(xué)中介服務(wù)委托合同的基礎(chǔ)上,從完善自費出國留學(xué)中介服務(wù)委托合同中介方違約的認(rèn)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)和承擔(dān)方式、歸責(zé)原則和舉證責(zé)任分配、強化對自費出國留學(xué)中介服務(wù)委托合同格式條款的規(guī)制、建立中介方違約的精神損害賠償制度四個方面對完善自費出國留學(xué)中介服務(wù)委托合同中介方違約責(zé)任進(jìn)行了思考。首先,對于舉證困難的問題,筆者認(rèn)為應(yīng)在對服務(wù)合同類型劃分作進(jìn)一步研究,同時對中介方的違約責(zé)任歸責(zé)原則實行嚴(yán)格責(zé)任,據(jù)此在中介方和委托方之間進(jìn)行舉證責(zé)任分配。其次,面對自費出國留學(xué)中介服務(wù)委托合同的格式條款問題,從事前、事中即對格式條款的具體規(guī)制和修改、事后救濟(jì)進(jìn)行解決。最后在嚴(yán)格限制適用范圍與構(gòu)成要件的基礎(chǔ)上,筆者認(rèn)為我國可以建立自費出國留學(xué)中介服務(wù)委托合同中介方違約的精神損害賠償制度。違約責(zé)任和侵權(quán)責(zé)任在一系列方面都存在著區(qū)別,當(dāng)事人維護(hù)自己權(quán)益時,在兩者競合的情況下,選擇通過違約責(zé)任抑或是通過侵權(quán)責(zé)任來維護(hù)自己的權(quán)益,會帶來不同的救濟(jì)結(jié)果。合同法理論的發(fā)展為違約責(zé)任精神損害賠償提供了理論支撐,國外立法狀況和我國司法實踐的做法也說明建立我國的違約精神損害完全是可行的。
[Abstract]:The first part of the article analyzes the particularity of the agency service contract and the particularity of the intermediary party's liability for breach of contract. The performance effect is closely related to the cooperation of the client and the performance has the particularity of timeliness and continuity, so the intermediary party's liability for breach of contract is different from that of the general liability for breach of contract in the determination of the responsibility of breach of contract. In the second part of the article, the author investigates the current situation of breach of contract by the intermediary party of the agency service entrusted to study abroad at his own expense. From the legal database of Peking University and other legal databases, the author searched the existing 17 judgments concerning the disputes over the entrustment contract for the agency service for studying abroad at his own expense. The form of breach of contract by the intermediary is divided into actual performance and refund of the contract, in which the failure to perform in accordance with the contract is classified as delay of performance, incomplete performance and expected breach of contract. In the disputes arising from the implementation of the contract of entrustment of agency services for studying abroad at one's own expense, the intermediary has resorted to the court because of breach of contract by the intermediary, and the intermediary has become the defendant of the first instance. The entrusting party is faced with difficulties in proving evidence when investigating the liability of the intermediary for breach of contract. A long, difficult situation. The third part of the article analyzes the fundamental causes of the intermediary party's breach of contract liability lies in the driving of economic interests and the lack of relevant regulatory supporting system. The direct reason comes from the extensive adoption of the format clauses in the contract of agency service entrustment for studying abroad at one's own expense in practice, that is, the breach of contract liability clause relieves the intermediary party's liability, and there is little agreement on liquidated damages; the refund clause infringes on the client's interests. The procedures for refund of fees are too complicated and harsh; the terms of the scholarship are not reasonable, and there are few remedies agreed upon to continue when the agency is unable to achieve the purpose of the contract. In addition, There are some other such as intermediary agencies to collect overdue fees unreasonable provisions. In view of the above problems, the article, in part 4th, on the basis of the contract of entrustment of agency service for studying abroad at its own expense, on the basis of no need to be famous, from perfecting the standard and the way of undertaking the breach of contract by the intermediary party of the contract of entrusting the agency service to study abroad, The principle of imputation and the distribution of the burden of proof strengthen the regulation on the form of the contract of entrusting the agency service to study abroad at one's own expense. Four aspects of establishing the system of compensation for spiritual damage of intermediary party breach of contract are considered to perfect the liability of breach of contract of agent party under agency service entrustment contract of studying abroad at his own expense. First of all, for the difficult problem of proof, The author believes that the classification of service contract types should be further studied, and the principle of liability for breach of contract should be strictly responsible for the intermediary party, according to which the burden of proof should be distributed between the intermediary party and the principal party. Secondly, In the face of the problem of the formal terms of the agency service entrustment contract for studying abroad at one's own expense, the specific regulation and modification of the form clause and the relief after the event are dealt with before it is engaged. Finally, on the basis of strictly limiting the scope of application and the constitutive requirements, The author thinks that our country can establish the system of compensation for spiritual damage caused by the breach of contract by the intermediary party under the agency service entrustment contract for studying abroad at one's own expense. There are differences between the liability for breach of contract and the liability for tort in a series of respects. In the case of the two competing, choosing to protect their rights and interests through breach of contract liability or tort liability will bring different relief results. The development of contract law theory provides theoretical support for moral damage compensation for breach of contract liability. The legislative situation of foreign countries and the judicial practice of our country also show that it is feasible to establish the spirit damage of breach of contract in our country.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南大學(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4條

1 周江洪;;服務(wù)合同在我國民法典中的定位及其制度構(gòu)建[J];法學(xué);2008年01期

2 周斌;違約精神損害賠償正當(dāng)性的理論探討[J];時代法學(xué);2005年01期

3 陸青;;違約精神損害賠償問題研究[J];清華法學(xué);2011年05期

4 周江洪;;服務(wù)合同的類型化及服務(wù)瑕疵研究[J];中外法學(xué);2008年05期

，

本文編號：1581448