本文選題：情勢變更 + 本土化�。� 參考：《華東政法大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文

【摘要】：自20世紀(jì)以來，經(jīng)過大陸法系和英美法系學(xué)者的反復(fù)梳理和討論，情勢變更原則已經(jīng)完成了必要的知識(shí)準(zhǔn)備，形成了各自法律體系之下的理論和適用共識(shí)。然而在中國，雖然從理論上看，對情勢變更原則的學(xué)理界定是科學(xué)和明確的。但在實(shí)踐中，它的內(nèi)容和邊界卻又顯得十分朦朧和模糊。不可否認(rèn)，現(xiàn)階段對情勢變更原則的研究仍處于理論分析階段，尚缺乏社會(huì)生活以及實(shí)務(wù)操作經(jīng)驗(yàn)作為基礎(chǔ)材料的支撐，致使司法實(shí)務(wù)中情勢變更原則的適用被籠罩在一團(tuán)迷霧之中，讓人感到無以名狀的困惑。鑒于此，有必要對情勢變更制度在理論和適用銜接過程中的若干問題進(jìn)行深入研討，以期對該制度的本土化構(gòu)建有所助益。 情勢變更原則的歷史變遷告訴我們，對情勢變更原則研究的核心不在于對其源起、含義、構(gòu)成要件的探討或說明，也不在于將其與周邊法律概念的區(qū)別和聯(lián)系進(jìn)行理論澄清，而在于領(lǐng)會(huì)民法誠實(shí)信用原則以及公平原則在合同法領(lǐng)域是如何體現(xiàn)合同實(shí)質(zhì)公平的。因此，需要進(jìn)一步對其進(jìn)行探尋的，正是發(fā)現(xiàn)合同實(shí)質(zhì)公平的方法。目前，雖然有部分學(xué)者初步認(rèn)識(shí)到這一點(diǎn)，，但他們在對情勢變更司法適用進(jìn)路進(jìn)行設(shè)計(jì)的過程中都遇到了難以回避的問題。實(shí)際上，學(xué)者們在研究情勢變更原則的過程中并沒有真正深刻認(rèn)識(shí)到，情勢變更原則所追求的是實(shí)質(zhì)理性，這與民法基本條文所追求的形式理性是背道而馳的，寄希望于使用嚴(yán)格的民法邏輯概念和框架對其進(jìn)行解釋必定是徒勞的。案件是否適用情勢變更原則只能在個(gè)案中依賴法官的自由裁量，而不能適用概念法學(xué)的方法將其納入到傳統(tǒng)民法學(xué)的邏輯體系之中。 鑒于此，文章提出了全新的情勢變更原則司法適用方法。文章認(rèn)為，情勢變更原則司法適用研究的總體進(jìn)路應(yīng)當(dāng)是：對“情勢變更事件→情勢變更原則適用”這一動(dòng)態(tài)過程進(jìn)行體系化思考，并將每一步所要參考的因素進(jìn)行總結(jié)提煉。這樣不僅可以實(shí)現(xiàn)情勢變更原則與周邊概念的合理區(qū)分，同時(shí)也能使法官在司法實(shí)踐中做到正確的理解與適用。在此基礎(chǔ)上，文章通過對《合同法司法解釋（二）》第26條的研究與實(shí)踐評析，將情勢變更與周邊概念在實(shí)務(wù)中的區(qū)分進(jìn)一步作出了判斷，并對情勢變更條款適用所要遵守的程序問題進(jìn)行了論述。最后，文章以樓市調(diào)控政策引發(fā)的房屋買賣合同糾紛是否可以適用以及如何適用情勢變更原則為例，對上文提出的情勢變更原則體系化適用理論進(jìn)行了實(shí)例證成。
[Abstract]:Since the 20th century, after repeated combing and discussion among scholars of civil law system and common law system, the principle of situation change has completed the necessary knowledge preparation and formed the theory and application consensus under their respective legal systems. However, in China, although the theoretical definition of the principle of change of circumstances is scientific and clear. But in practice, its content and boundary appear very hazy and fuzzy. There is no denying that the research on the principle of situation change is still in the stage of theoretical analysis at the present stage and lacks the support of social life and practical operation experience as the basic materials. As a result, the application of the principle of situation change in judicial practice is shrouded in a fog, which makes people feel confused. In view of this, it is necessary to study in depth some problems in the course of theoretical and applicable cohesion of the regime of change of circumstances, in order to be helpful to the localization of the system. The historical change of the principle of change of circumstances tells us that the core of the study of the principle of change of circumstances is not the discussion or explanation of its origin, meaning, constitutive elements, nor the theoretical clarification of the difference and connection between it and the surrounding legal concepts. It lies in understanding the principle of good faith in civil law and how the principle of fairness in the field of contract law embodies the substantive fairness of contract. Therefore, it needs to be further explored, it is to find the substantive fairness of the contract method. At present, although some scholars have realized this point, they have encountered some unavoidable problems in the process of designing the path of judicial application of situational change. In fact, in the course of studying the principle of change of circumstances, scholars do not really realize that the principle of change of circumstances pursues substantial rationality, which runs counter to the formal rationality pursued by the basic provisions of civil law. It is futile to hope that the strict concept and framework of civil law logic can be used to explain it. Whether the principle of change of circumstances is applicable in a case can only depend on the discretion of the judge in a case, but it cannot be brought into the logic system of traditional civil law by applying the method of conceptual jurisprudence. In view of this, the article proposed a new principle of judicial application of the principle of change of circumstances. This paper holds that the overall approach to the study of the judicial application of the principle of circumstance change should be: to systematize the dynamic process of the application of the principle of change of circumstances to the principle of change of circumstances, and to sum up and refine the factors to be referred to in each step. In this way, it can not only realize the reasonable distinction between the principle of change of circumstances and the surrounding concepts, but also make the judge understand and apply correctly in judicial practice. On this basis, the article makes a further judgment on the distinction between the change of circumstances and the surrounding concepts in practice by analyzing the research and practice of Article 26 of the Judicial interpretation of contract Law (2). It also discusses the procedure to be observed in the application of the change of circumstances clause. Finally, taking whether and how to apply the principle of situation change caused by the property market regulation and control policy, the paper gives an example to prove the theory of systematization of the principle of change of circumstances.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號】：D923

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前2條

1 張建軍;情勢變更與商業(yè)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的比較探討[J];甘肅政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2004年02期

2 顏雪明;;買房貸款落空不屬于情勢變更[J];仲裁研究;2010年04期

本文編號：1796481