本文選題：無償性 + 贈與合同�。� 參考：《西南財經(jīng)大學》2012年博士論文

【摘要】：無償性是贈與合同的本質(zhì)特征,受無償性的影響,贈與合同產(chǎn)生了許多與有償合同不同的規(guī)則。在贈與合同中,由于雙方?jīng)]有對價交易,如果采用有償合同的規(guī)則,顯然會導致雙方的利益失衡。在這種情況下,法律不得不以無償性為基點,設(shè)計出與有償合同不同的規(guī)則,但是,這些規(guī)則不管是在理論上,還是在司法實務中,頗受爭議,其根源在于對無償性的認識不同。為了正確理解無償性的內(nèi)涵,正確把握無償性的作用,制定出公平合理的贈與規(guī)則,有必要探討無償性對贈與合同規(guī)則的影響。 一、文章的主要內(nèi)容 第一章,“贈與合同無償性的正當性論證”。無償性是本文研究的邏輯起點,它的正當性,意在揭示人們?yōu)槭裁匆沿敭a(chǎn)無償贈與他人,回答無償贈與為何會獲得法律的保護,在界定無償性的基礎(chǔ)上,對其法理基礎(chǔ)和效力根源進行分析,為后文的研究奠定理論基礎(chǔ)。研究認為,無償性的本質(zhì)在于贈與人付出財產(chǎn)上的利益,受贈人獲得財產(chǎn)上的利益。其正當性來源是：第一,人性基礎(chǔ)。人是道德律的主體,人性在本質(zhì)上是善良的和關(guān)心社會的,人生來就具有同情心,并且關(guān)懷他們的同類。當有人處于困境的時候,人們就會聯(lián)想到如果自己遭遇同樣處境時的心情和需要救助的渴望,人性中的同情、關(guān)切和仁愛就會自然突顯出來,從而產(chǎn)生贈與的意志；第二,社會基礎(chǔ)。人是一種社會動物,天性少不了合作和互助,幫助別人就等于幫助自己。每個單獨的個體,在困難面前都是弱小的,只有聯(lián)合起來,互惠互利,才能以集體的力量戰(zhàn)勝未知的困難；第三,經(jīng)濟基礎(chǔ)。贈與可以產(chǎn)生合作剩余,是一個公共產(chǎn)品,在每一個人有困難的時候,都會受益。無償贈與獲得法律保護的效力根源是：意思自治。人們的共同意志有創(chuàng)設(shè)法律的功能,同理,雙方當事人的意志也有創(chuàng)設(shè)合同的功能,合同的正當性就來自于人們的意志本身,其創(chuàng)設(shè)的合同具有相當于法律的效力。因此,贈與人自愿把財產(chǎn)無償贈與他人,其正當性就源于意思自治,理應獲得法律的保護。無償性贈與的存在,不僅是民法制度構(gòu)造的需要,其本身也是每個人利益的需要。 第二章,“無償性對贈與合同成立規(guī)則的影響”。本章是全文的重點和難點之一,圍繞贈與合同成立的相關(guān)理論,對其進行系統(tǒng)的梳理和評析。認為諾成性+任意撤銷權(quán)的立法模式,不符合中國國情和人們的生活方式,也不能平衡合同雙方的利益,應當回歸無償性的本性,采用實踐性與諾成性的區(qū)分模式；在贈與合同的形式上,認為無償性對當事人的權(quán)益影響很大,如果采用不要式,難以避免考慮不周和信口開河的情況出現(xiàn),難以保證意思表達的真實性,因此應根據(jù)不同的贈與,區(qū)分要式和不要式的立法模式。對某些重要的贈與,有必要采用特定形式,以警示雙方當事人要謹慎處分自己的財產(chǎn)權(quán)利,使贈與合同的規(guī)則設(shè)定更加合理。 第三章,“無償性對贈與合同生效規(guī)則的影響”。贈與合同是否發(fā)生法律效力,與主體和客體因素有關(guān)。受無償性影響,贈與合同的主體和客體與有償合同相比差異較大。在有償合同中,雙方當事人都必須具有完全民事行為能力。受無償性的影響,在贈與合同中,受贈人可以是任何人,不受行為能力的限制,其理由在于受贈人是純獲利益,能否辨認自己的行為后果,都不會危及本人利益、他人利益和公共利益。贈與合同的客體受無償性的影響,也與有償合同的客體不完全一致,其范圍要比有償合同廣泛得多。不管是有形財產(chǎn),還是無形的財產(chǎn),只要不違反法律規(guī)定,都可以作為贈與的客體。 第四章,“無償性對贈與合同‘失效’規(guī)則的影響”。一般情況下,有償合同沒有“失效”規(guī)則,合同一旦發(fā)生效力,就不可能再失去效力。然而,對于贈與合同,受無償性的影響,準予發(fā)生效力的合同在一定條件下失去效力。因此,贈與合同產(chǎn)生了三個使合同失去效力的特有規(guī)則,即任意撤銷權(quán)、法定撤銷權(quán)和貧困抗辯權(quán),目的就是彌補贈與人因無償贈與他人財產(chǎn)而產(chǎn)生的利益不平衡狀態(tài)。其中任意撤銷權(quán)是本文的重點與難點,基于無償性,適當優(yōu)待贈與人無可厚非,但是,給予一個沒有限制的任意撤銷權(quán),與權(quán)利本身相沖突。我們不能因贈與合同的無償性,就準許贈與人隨意“出爾反爾”突破民法的基本原則,這種以犧牲基本原則為代價的權(quán)利,違背了民法的基本精神,認為沒有正當性,建議予以廢除。法定撤銷權(quán)和貧困抗辯權(quán)是維護贈與人利益不可缺少的權(quán)利。法定撤銷權(quán)是對“忘恩負義”的受贈人進行懲罰,彰顯贈與合同的道德本質(zhì)。貧困抗辯權(quán)是對“助人為樂”的贈與人進行保護,解除贈與人的后顧之憂。 第五章,“無償性對贈與合同法律責任規(guī)則的影響”。贈與合同的無償性,不但影響其權(quán)利義務的構(gòu)造,還對雙方的法律責任產(chǎn)生影響。為了平衡贈與人因贈與而受到的財產(chǎn)損失,在責任階段采用的措施是減輕贈與人的法律責任,以達到鼓勵贈與的目的。贈與人對一般過失不承擔責任,僅對故意和重大過失承擔責任；不對間接損失承擔責任,僅對直接損失承擔責任, 結(jié)論：對無償性的影響力,作出了簡要的檢討和完善建議。認為,我們不能無限夸大無償性對贈與合同規(guī)則的影響力,只有辯證地看待無償性的影響力,才可能實現(xiàn)雙方的利益平衡,才能完善贈與合同制度。 二、研究的創(chuàng)新之處及有待進一步探索的問題 (一)可能的創(chuàng)新之處 1、視角上有所突破 以無償性為視角,探索其對贈與合同規(guī)則的影響,與有償合同相比,可能屬于較新領(lǐng)域的研究,拓寬了合同規(guī)則的研究范圍和視野,豐富了合同制度的內(nèi)容。 2、對無償性影響力的澄清 過去,由于某種誤解,我們夸大了無償性對贈與合同規(guī)則的影響,認為贈與規(guī)則的設(shè)定,應當偏向贈與人,才能實現(xiàn)利益平衡。事實上,兼顧雙方的利益,才有利于鼓勵贈與,有利于實現(xiàn)法律效果和社會效果的統(tǒng)一。只有辯證地看待無償性問題,才能較好地實現(xiàn)贈與的宗旨,減少贈與糾紛的發(fā)生。理性地看待無償性的特點,對贈與規(guī)則加以改造和完善,才能更好地保障雙方當事人的合法權(quán)益。 3、提出廢除任意撤銷權(quán)的建議 受無償性的影響,我國《合同法》設(shè)立了“諾而不成”的任意撤銷權(quán)制度。認為這與我國國情不相符,在現(xiàn)實生活中產(chǎn)生的許多贈與糾紛,就是由于贈與人“依法”不遵守承諾造成的。任意撤銷權(quán)的設(shè)立,無疑給那些無誠信的人,以合法的借口和理由,一方面誠懇地向他人許諾將贈與多少財產(chǎn),一方面又在財產(chǎn)權(quán)利轉(zhuǎn)移之前,行使合法的任意撤銷權(quán),導致合同被撤銷,這樣的贈與允諾和“戲言”沒有本質(zhì)區(qū)別。無償性不是設(shè)立任意撤銷權(quán)的理由,任意撤銷權(quán)的設(shè)立,沒有正當性依據(jù)：第一,它違背了誠實信用原則；第二,它違背了合同自由原則；第三,它違背了合同正義原則；且任意撤銷權(quán)的配置失衡,消極作用突顯。為此,提出了廢除任意撤銷權(quán)的建議。另外,法定撤銷權(quán)與貧困抗辯權(quán)有其合理性,建議保留及完善。 4、提出雙方利益平衡的新模式 在建議廢除任意撤銷權(quán)的基礎(chǔ)上,提出“區(qū)分”模式,這種模式更有利于平衡雙方的利益,也更加符合我國國情和人們的生活方式。區(qū)分一：一般口頭贈與合同、人身性財產(chǎn)的贈與合同為實踐合同,具有公益性質(zhì)或者道德性質(zhì)的口頭贈與合同、書面合同為諾成合同；區(qū)分二：以財產(chǎn)交付為權(quán)利變動的贈與合同、以公益或者道義為目的贈與合同為不要式合同,以財產(chǎn)登記為權(quán)利變動的贈與合同為要式合同。 (二)不足之處 由于本人是一名司法實務工作者,理論水平有限,加上無償性理論的復雜性,盡管竭盡全力,輕重緩急還是難以做到兼顧,邏輯駕馭仍然比較困難,難免顧此失彼,不合理的論述和不成熟之觀點在所難免,再加之掌握的文獻資料有限,在一定程度上影響了研究的質(zhì)量和完整性。通過本次學習,深感自己的無知,以此告誡自己,今后更要努力學習! (三)有待進一步研究的問題 贈與合同受無償性的影響,對贈與人需作某些優(yōu)待保護,這些優(yōu)待的尺度如何把握?贈與損害如何救濟?特種贈與如何認定?等等問題,都有待下一步的深入研究。
[Abstract]:Free sex is the essential feature of the gift contract. The grant contract produces many rules different from the paid contract under the influence of the gratuitous nature. In the gift contract, as the two parties do not deal with the price, the rules of the paid contract obviously lead to the balance of interests between the two parties. In this case, the law has to be based on gratuitous. The rules which are different from the paid contract are designed, but the rules, whether in theory or in the judicial practice, are quite controversial. The origin of these rules is the different understanding of the unpaid nature. In order to understand the connotation of compensation without compensation correctly, correctly grasp the function of the free sex and formulate a fair and reasonable gift rule, it is necessary to discuss the free sex to the gift. The influence of the contract rules.
First, the main contents of the article
The first chapter, "justification of the gratuitous nature of the gift contract". The gratuitous nature of this article is the logical starting point of this study. Its legitimacy is intended to reveal why people give property to others without compensation and answer why the free gift will be protected by the law. On the basis of defining the unpaid nature, it analyzes its legal basis and root cause. The latter study lays a theoretical foundation. The study holds that the essence of gratuitous nature lies in the benefit of the donor in the property, and the recipient gains the interests of the property. Its legitimacy is the first, the foundation of human nature, the human being the subject of the moral law, the nature of kindness and caring for the society, and the compassion and concern of life. They are of their kind. When people are in trouble, people think that if they are in the same mood and the desire to be rescued, the sympathy, concern and kindness in human nature will emerge naturally, thus generating the will of gift; second, the social foundation. Man is a social animal, and nature is not a cooperation and mutual assistance. To help others is to help themselves. Each individual is weak in the face of difficulties. Only together, mutual benefit and mutual benefit can overcome the unknown difficulties with the strength of the collective. Third, the economic basis. A gift can produce a cooperative surplus, which is a public product, and will benefit every person when it is difficult. Free gift. The root of the validity of the legal protection is autonomy. The common will of the people has the function of creating the law. In the same way, the will of the parties also has the function of creating the contract. The legitimacy of the contract comes from the will of the people itself and the contract created by the parties is equivalent to the legal effect. Therefore, the donor voluntarily makes the property free. The justification of the gift to others is derived from the autonomy of the meaning, and the protection of the law should be obtained. The existence of free gift is not only the need of the structure of the civil law system, but also the need of everyone's interests.
The second chapter, "the effect of gratuitous on the rules of the establishment of the gift contract". This chapter is one of the key and difficult points of the full text. This chapter systematically combs and evaluates the relevant theories of the gift contract. The legislative model of Nobel + arbitrarily revocation right does not conform to China's national conditions and people's life style, and does not balance the parties to the contract. The interests should return to the nature of free sex and adopt the pattern of distinction between practice and nature; in the form of a gift contract, it is considered that no compensation has a great influence on the rights and interests of the parties. If it is not used, it is difficult to avoid the occurrence of untimely consideration and opening up the river, so it is difficult to ensure the authenticity of the expression, so it should be based on the difference. For some important gifts, it is necessary to use specific forms to warn both parties to dispose of their property rights carefully and to make the rules of the grant contract more reasonable.
The third chapter, "the effect of gratuitous on the rules of the entry into force of the gift contract". The legal effect of the grant contract is related to the subject and the object factor. The subject and object of the grant contract are different from the paid contract under the influence of gratuitous. In the paid contract, both parties must have full civil capacity. In the gift contract, in the gift contract, the donee may be any person, not subject to the limitation of the capacity of the act. The reason is that the recipient is the pure benefit, and whether the person can recognize the consequences of his own behavior will not jeopardize the interests of the person, the interests of others and the public interest. The object of the gift contract is affected by the non compensation and the object of the paid contract is not completely one. The scope of the contract is much wider than that of the paid contract. Whether it is tangible property or intangible property, it can be regarded as the object of donation if it does not violate the provisions of the law.
The fourth chapter, "the effect of gratuitous on the 'invalidation' rule of the gift contract." in general, a paid contract does not have a "failure" rule. Once a contract has effect, it can not lose its effect. However, the contract of grant is affected by the non compensation, the contract granted the effect is lost under certain conditions. Therefore, the gift contract is given. There are three special rules for the loss of the contract, namely, the arbitrarily revocation right, the legal revocation right and the right of the plea of poverty. The purpose is to make up for the disequilibrium state of interest resulting from the gratuitous gift of the gift to others. Giving an unrestricted right to arbitrarily revocation is in conflict with the right itself. We can not allow the giver to break through the basic principles of the civil law as a result of the gratuitous nature of the gift contract. The right to sacrifice the basic principles at the expense of the basic principles is contrary to the basic spirit of the civil law, and it is suggested to be abolished without justification. The right of revocation and plea of poverty is an indispensable right to safeguard the interests of the donator. The legal revocation right is to punish the donee of "ungrateful" and to highlight the moral nature of the gift contract.
The fifth chapter, "the effect of gratuitous on the legal liability rules of the gift contract". The gratuitous nature of the grant contract not only affects the construction of its rights and obligations, but also has an impact on the legal responsibility of the two parties. In order to balance the loss of the property of the giver due to the gift, the measures adopted at the stage of responsibility are to reduce the legal responsibility of the donors, so as to achieve the legal responsibility of the donors. The purpose of encouragement is to be encouraged. The donor is not responsible for general negligence and is responsible only for deliberate and gross negligence; it is not liable for indirect losses and is only responsible for direct losses.
Conclusion: a brief review and perfect suggestion are made for the unpaid influence. We believe that we can not exaggerate the influence of the free sex on the rules of the grant contract. Only if we treat the influence of the gratuitous nature dialectically, we can realize the balance of interests between the two parties and improve the system of gift and contract.
Two, the innovation of the research and the problems to be further explored.
(I) possible innovations
1, there are some breakthroughs in the Perspective
From the perspective of gratuitous, it explores its influence on the contract rules of the grant. Compared with the paid contract, it may belong to the research in the new field, widening the scope and view of the contract rules and enriching the content of the contract system.
2, clarification of the unpaid influence
In the past, due to some misunderstanding, we exaggerated the effect of gratuitous on the rules of the gift contract. It was thought that the setting of the gift rules should be biased towards the giver to achieve a balance of interests. In fact, taking into account the interests of both parties is conducive to encouraging the donation and the unification of the legal effect and the social effect. In order to better guarantee the legitimate rights and interests of the parties, we can better realize the purpose of the gift and reduce the occurrence of the disputes.
3, the proposal to abolish the right of arbitrarily revocation
Under the influence of non compensation, the contract law of China has set up a system of arbitrarily revocation of "noo and not". It is not consistent with the national conditions of our country. Many disputes arising from the real life are caused by the "law" of the donor. The establishment of the arbitrarily revocation right is no doubt to those who are not good faith. On the pretext and reasons, on the one hand, it is true to promise to others how many properties will be given to others, on the one hand, to exercise the legal arbitrarily revocation right before the transfer of property rights, causing the contract to be revoked, which is not essentially different from the promise and "drama". On the basis of sex: first, it violates the principle of honesty and credit; second, it violates the principle of freedom of contract; third, it violates the principle of contract justice; and the allocation of arbitrarily revocation right is unbalanced and negative. Therefore, it puts forward the suggestion to abolish the right of arbitrarily revocation. In addition, the legal revocation right and the right of poverty defense have its rationality, suggestion Keep and perfect.
4, a new model of balance of interests between the two sides
On the basis of recommending the abolition of arbitrarily revocation right, the "distinction" model is put forward, which is more conducive to the balance of the interests of both sides, and is more in line with the national conditions of our country and the way of life of people. Contract, written contract is a contract of noo; distinction two: a gift contract which is delivered as a right by property, giving a contract as a contract for the purpose of public welfare or moral, and a gift contract with property registration as a right change.
(two) inadequacies
Because I am a judicial practice worker, the level of theory is limited and the complexity of the theory of gratuitous nature is complicated. Although I do our utmost, it is difficult to give consideration to the importance of priority, it is still difficult to control logic. To a certain extent, it affects the quality and integrity of the research. Through this study, I feel deeply ignorant of myself and tell myself that I will study harder in the future.
(three) questions to be further studied
The gift contract is affected by the non compensation, and it is necessary to give some preferential treatment to the donor. How to grasp the size of the preferential treatment? How to relieve the damage of the gift? How to identify the special gift? And so on, the further research is needed.
【學位授予單位】：西南財經(jīng)大學
【學位級別】：博士
【學位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D923.6

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 金錦萍;;當贈與(遺贈)遭遇婚外同居的時候:公序良俗與制度協(xié)調(diào)[J];北大法律評論;2004年00期

2 申衛(wèi)星,王琦;論人體器官捐獻與移植的立法原則[J];比較法研究;2005年04期

3 鄭全慈;論合同形式的法律演變──兼論《合同法》對合同形式的規(guī)定[J];當代法學;1999年05期

4 馬新彥;受贈人權(quán)利三論──兼評《合同法》第十一章[J];當代法學;2000年02期

5 張彩云;論贈與合同的性質(zhì)[J];當代法學;2000年04期

6 崔廣平;論合同的形式[J];當代法學;2002年02期

7 馮彥君;社會弱勢群體法律保護問題論綱[J];當代法學;2005年04期

8 鄭志奮;;對公證不可撤銷效力的探究——兼議經(jīng)公證不可撤銷的贈與合同[J];中國司法;2008年09期

9 張鴻兵;諾成性是合同的基本特性[J];法律科學.西北政法學院學報;1991年02期

10 馬新彥;信賴與信賴利益考[J];法律科學.西北政法學院學報;2000年03期

，

本文編號：1933903