本文選題：消費者 + 反悔權(quán)　； 參考：《武漢理工大學》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：消費者法定反悔權(quán)是順應(yīng)保障社會弱勢群體這一立法政策的,為實現(xiàn)消費者與經(jīng)營者間的實質(zhì)公正、解決現(xiàn)實糾紛提供了有效保障。消費者反悔權(quán)在我國部分行政法規(guī)、地方性法規(guī)、行政規(guī)章中有所規(guī)定,但是,一方面現(xiàn)有規(guī)定的位階過低,導(dǎo)致反悔權(quán)普適性不強,規(guī)范效力弱；另一方面,即使在一定范圍得以適用,由于對權(quán)利的產(chǎn)生、期間、終止、行使方式、行使法律后果缺乏健全的規(guī)定,在適用過程中遇到瓶頸。因此,我們有必要借鑒國外有關(guān)消費者反悔權(quán)的立法,結(jié)合我國的立法體系,在狹義法律層面對消費者反悔權(quán)立法模式予以構(gòu)架,對其內(nèi)容予以探究。 本文分五個部分,通過分析消費者反悔權(quán)的現(xiàn)有研究、消費者法定反悔權(quán)的一般理論以及國內(nèi)外有關(guān)立法,提出完善我國消費者法定反悔權(quán)的立法模式及具體內(nèi)容的建議。 第一部分,從實踐、理論、立法三方面闡述選題意義,進而提出本文研究“我國消費者法定反悔權(quán)的立法模式及具體內(nèi)容”之目的。同時,運用文獻研究法,對國內(nèi)外研究進行綜述,構(gòu)建本文研究思路。 第二部分,首先通過對國內(nèi)外消費者反悔權(quán)概念進行比較分析,用定義法對狹義法律層面的消費者反悔權(quán)予以界定,即消費者法定反悔權(quán),是指消費者在消費合同生效之日起,依法律規(guī)定,在一定期限內(nèi)享有的不影響商品或服務(wù)二次交易的、無需承擔合同責任及行權(quán)費用的單方取消交易致合同自始不發(fā)生效力的權(quán)利。其次,該部分通過比較法將法定反悔權(quán)與法定解除權(quán)、撤銷權(quán)予以區(qū)分,確定消費者法定反悔權(quán)為獨立的形成權(quán)這一性質(zhì)。再次,結(jié)合案例、實質(zhì)正義理論、消費者知情權(quán)保護及現(xiàn)有立法的局限性,論證消費者法定反悔權(quán)存在的必要性。 第三部分,在文義解釋的基礎(chǔ)上審視英美德關(guān)于消費者反悔權(quán)的立法,對其有關(guān)消費者反悔權(quán)的立法模式及具體內(nèi)容進行簡要分析,合理借鑒德國法確定的統(tǒng)一立法模式、較廣的適用范圍、合理的權(quán)利期間、對退回貨物風險承擔主體的考量以及英美德規(guī)定的書面行權(quán)方式、相互返還受領(lǐng)的給付之義務(wù)、消費者合理保管商品的義務(wù)等。 第四部分,對國內(nèi)消費者反悔權(quán)立法現(xiàn)狀進行分析,總結(jié)國內(nèi)規(guī)定位階過低,反悔權(quán)適用范圍窄、起點模糊、期間不一致、終止情形不明確、行使方式規(guī)定不全面、行權(quán)后原合同效力無規(guī)定、行權(quán)費用承擔主體和內(nèi)容以及消費者對商品保管和退回商品風險承擔的義務(wù)不確切等立法不足,為文章最后一部分的制度構(gòu)建指明切入點。 第五部分,結(jié)合我國現(xiàn)有立法架構(gòu),借助合同實質(zhì)正義、差異性平等原則等,在《合同法》、《消費者權(quán)益保護法》中對消費者反悔權(quán)作統(tǒng)一規(guī)定：將其適用范圍界定在全部交易領(lǐng)域,同時排除小額交易、易腐蝕變質(zhì)的商品交易等；確定消費者法定反悔權(quán)的起點為合同生效之日,反悔權(quán)期間為14日,期間屆滿、消費者主動放棄等事由可導(dǎo)致反悔權(quán)終止；消費者可通過書面、口頭等形式直接行使反悔權(quán)；反悔權(quán)行使后,原消費合同視為自始不生效,消費者退回已收商品并保證不影響二次銷售,退回前消費者有合理保管義務(wù),退回中消費者承擔毀損滅失風險。此時,經(jīng)營者返還已收價款,并承擔消費者行使反悔權(quán)產(chǎn)生的包裝、郵寄、運輸費用等。
[Abstract]:The right of consumer ' s legal regret is to comply with the legislation policy of protecting the vulnerable groups of society . In order to realize the substantive justice between consumers and operators , the effective guarantee is provided for solving the real disputes . The right of consumers to regret is regulated in some administrative regulations , local regulations and administrative rules of our country , but on the one hand , the level of the existing regulations is too low , which leads to the weak universality of the right of repentance and the weak normative effect ;
On the other hand , even within a certain range , because of the lack of sound regulations on the production , the period , the termination and the exercise of rights and the lack of sound legal consequences , it is necessary to draw lessons from the legislation of foreign consumers ' anti - regret right in the process of application . Therefore , it is necessary to draw on the legislation of our country ' s legislation system , and construct the legislation model of consumer ' s right of regret at the narrow legal level , and explore the content .

This article is divided into five parts , by analyzing the existing research on consumer ' s right to deregret , the general theory of consumer ' s legal right to regret and the relevant legislation at home and abroad , this paper puts forward the legislative model and suggestion of perfecting the right of consumer ' s legal right to regret .

The first part , from the three aspects of practice , theory and legislation , expounds the significance of choosing the subject , and then puts forward the aim of studying the legislative mode and the concrete contents of " the right of the consumers in our country " . At the same time , the article summarizes the domestic and foreign research and constructs the thinking of this paper .

In the second part , firstly , by comparing the concept of consumer ' s right to regret at home and abroad , the definition of consumer ' s right of regret is defined by the definition method .

The third part , on the basis of the literal interpretation , examines the legislation of the right of consumers ' anti - regret , analyzes the legislation pattern and the specific contents of the right of consumers ' remorse , reasonably uses the unified legislative model established by the German law , the broader application range , the reasonable right period , the consideration of the risk of returning the goods and the written line of rights stipulated by the Anglo - American virtue , the obligation to return the received payment , the obligation of the consumer to keep the goods reasonably and so on .

In the fourth part , this paper analyzes the current situation of domestic consumer ' s anti - regret right legislation , summarizes the scope of the domestic regulations , the narrow scope of application scope , the ambiguity of the starting point , the period inconsistency , the termination situation is not clear , the exercise mode is not comprehensive , the effect of the original contract after the right of exercise is not clear , the right expenses bear the subject and the content and the consumer ' s obligation to keep and return the commodity risk is not exact , etc . , and the point of entry is specified for the system construction of the last part of the article .

In the fifth part , according to the existing legislation structure of our country , by means of the principle of substantive justice and difference equality of contract , the consumer ' s right of regret is unified under the law of contract law , consumer ' s rights and interests protection law : the scope of application is defined in the whole transaction field , and the commodity trade , such as small trade and perishable goods , is excluded .
It is determined that the starting point of the consumer ' s legal anti - regret right is the date of the contract entry into force , the period of the right of repentance is 14 days , the period expires , and the consumer ' s active waiver can lead to the termination of the right of regret ;
The consumer may exercise the right of repentance directly in the form of written , oral and other forms ;
After the exercise of the right of repentance , the original consumption contract is deemed to have not entered into force since the beginning , and the consumer returns the returned goods and ensures that it does not affect the secondary sales , the consumer has reasonable custody obligations , and the returned consumer assumes the risk of damage and loss . At this time , the operator returns the accepted price and assumes the packaging , mailing and transportation expenses incurred by the consumer in exercising the right of regret .

【學位授予單位】：武漢理工大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D923.8

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 張靖;;英國冷卻期制度的立法探究及啟示[J];長沙理工大學學報(社會科學版);2011年03期

2 汪傳才;;分時度假的消費者保護初探[J];法律科學.西北政法學院學報;2006年04期

3 尚曉玲;論在線交易中的消費者權(quán)益保護[J];湖北社會科學;2004年06期

4 喬新生;;冷卻期制度的法律性質(zhì)[J];法治論壇;2009年04期

5 余曉輝;;消費者反悔權(quán)淺論[J];法制與社會;2008年20期

6 張川;;淺析消費者反悔權(quán)[J];法制與社會;2008年34期

7 趙秋雁;;B2C電子商務(wù)中冷卻期制度的國際借鑒[J];國際經(jīng)濟合作;2008年03期

8 董新凱,夏瑜;冷卻期制度與消費者權(quán)益保護[J];河北法學;2005年05期

9 嚴歡歡;;冷卻期制度研究[J];河南公安高等�？茖W校學報;2007年04期

10 王利明;合同法的目標與鼓勵交易[J];法學研究;1996年03期

相關(guān)碩士學位論文 前7條

1 閆金;消費者反悔權(quán)法律制度研究[D];中國政法大學;2011年

2 何國萍;民法基本原則的沖突與協(xié)調(diào)[D];中國政法大學;2011年

3 張再喜;論我國消費者反悔權(quán)制度的完善[D];湖南師范大學;2011年

4 丁金環(huán);論消費者后悔權(quán)[D];湖南師范大學;2011年

5 盧菁菁;冷卻期法律制度研究[D];南京理工大學;2009年

6 姜旭;消費者反悔權(quán)研究[D];西南政法大學;2010年

7 徐世明;論無因解約權(quán)[D];西南政法大學;2010年

，

本文編號：1833118