本文選題：物業(yè)服務(wù)合同 + 抗辯權(quán)��； 參考：《華中科技大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：目前，雖然我國(guó)有《物業(yè)服務(wù)管理?xiàng)l例》、《合同法》以及相關(guān)司法解釋對(duì)物業(yè)服務(wù)合同簽訂及業(yè)主和物業(yè)服務(wù)企業(yè)的權(quán)利義務(wù)作出了規(guī)定，但是物業(yè)服務(wù)合同的糾紛還是經(jīng)常發(fā)生，由此可見(jiàn)，解決物業(yè)合同糾紛依然是一個(gè)重要的問(wèn)題。物業(yè)服務(wù)合同關(guān)系到每一個(gè)業(yè)主的日常生活，由于物業(yè)服務(wù)的種類(lèi)多且每個(gè)人的評(píng)價(jià)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)不完全一樣，所以很容易引起物業(yè)合同的糾紛。因此，如何處理好物業(yè)服務(wù)合同的糾紛問(wèn)題關(guān)系到業(yè)主是否能夠安居樂(lè)業(yè)的問(wèn)題。在目前物業(yè)服務(wù)合同糾紛的種類(lèi)當(dāng)中，主要的類(lèi)型就是業(yè)主行使抗辯權(quán)的問(wèn)題，其原因是由于物業(yè)服務(wù)企業(yè)的服務(wù)違約，其表現(xiàn)形式是業(yè)主拒絕繳納物業(yè)費(fèi)。然而，業(yè)主用拒絕交物業(yè)費(fèi)的這種抗辯方式來(lái)維護(hù)自己的權(quán)利應(yīng)當(dāng)符合一定的規(guī)定和程序的，任意地行使抗辯權(quán)是不被法律所允許的。業(yè)主是否具有抗辯權(quán)，業(yè)主抗辯權(quán)具有何種類(lèi)型，以及抗辯權(quán)制度如何完善，應(yīng)當(dāng)加以研究。 本文針對(duì)業(yè)主行使抗辯權(quán)所對(duì)抗的對(duì)象不同，將業(yè)主抗辯權(quán)進(jìn)行了分類(lèi)，并將業(yè)主行使抗辯權(quán)的各種情形和事由結(jié)合具體的案例進(jìn)行研究和分析，并將抗辯事由類(lèi)型化，，對(duì)哪些類(lèi)型能否行使抗辯權(quán)提出我自己的見(jiàn)解。還對(duì)完善業(yè)主抗辯權(quán)的立法及將物業(yè)服務(wù)合同有名化提出了自己的想法。本文第一章簡(jiǎn)述了物業(yè)服務(wù)合同的概念和特征，闡述了抗辯權(quán)的產(chǎn)生和發(fā)展以及闡述了業(yè)主抗辯權(quán)的產(chǎn)生基礎(chǔ)、業(yè)主行使抗辯權(quán)的現(xiàn)狀及存在的問(wèn)題。第二章闡述了業(yè)主對(duì)物業(yè)服務(wù)企業(yè)行使抗辯權(quán)的種類(lèi)并結(jié)合《物業(yè)服務(wù)管理?xiàng)l例》和《關(guān)于審理物業(yè)服務(wù)糾紛案件具體應(yīng)用法律若干問(wèn)題的解釋》以及相關(guān)案例具體分析了業(yè)主行使抗辯權(quán)的內(nèi)容及限制。第三章是業(yè)主抗辯權(quán)在法律上的完善，提出了本人的見(jiàn)解，旨在使業(yè)主維護(hù)自己的權(quán)益有法可依，有章可循。
[Abstract]:At present, although there are regulations on the Management of property Services in China, the contract Law and related judicial interpretations provide for the signing of property service contracts and the rights and obligations of property owners and property service enterprises. But the dispute of the property service contract still occurs frequently, thus, it is still an important problem to resolve the dispute of the property contract. The contract of property service relates to the daily life of every owner. Because there are many kinds of property service and the evaluation standard of each person is not exactly the same, it is easy to cause the dispute of the property contract. Therefore, how to deal with the dispute of property service contract is related to whether the owner can live and work in peace and contentment. At present, the main type of disputes of property service contract is the problem that the owner exercises the right of defense, the reason is that the service breach of service of the property service enterprise, its manifestation is the owner refuses to pay the property fee. However, the owner should comply with certain regulations and procedures to defend his right by refusing to pay the property fee. The right of defense is not permitted by law. Whether the owner has the defense right, what kind of the owner's defense right, and how to perfect the defense right system, should be studied. And the owners exercise the right of defense of various circumstances and reasons combined with specific cases to study and analysis, and the defense of the type, which types of whether to exercise the right of defense to put forward my own opinion. The author also puts forward his own idea to perfect the legislation of the owner's right of defense and to make the property service contract famous. The first chapter describes the concept and characteristics of the property service contract, expounds the emergence and development of the right of defense, expounds the foundation of the owner's right of defense, the present situation of the owner's exercise of the right of defense and the existing problems. The second chapter expounds the types of the owners' right of defense to the property service enterprises, and combines with the regulations on the Management of property Services and the explanation of some issues concerning the Application of the Law in the trial of disputes concerning the property Services, and the relevant cases. The author analyzes the content and limitation of the owner's right of defense. The third chapter is the legal perfection of the owner's right of defense, and puts forward his own opinion, aiming to make the owner maintain his rights and interests according to the law and rules.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華中科技大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D923.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前8條

1 申衛(wèi)星;對(duì)民事法律關(guān)系內(nèi)容構(gòu)成的反思[J];比較法研究;2004年01期

2 杜萬(wàn)華;辛正郁;楊永清;;最高人民法院《關(guān)于審理建筑物區(qū)分所有權(quán)糾紛案件具體應(yīng)用法律若干問(wèn)題的解釋》、《關(guān)于審理物業(yè)服務(wù)糾紛案件具體應(yīng)用法律若干問(wèn)題的解釋》的理解與適用[J];法律適用;2009年07期

3 姜錚莉;;淺議業(yè)主團(tuán)體法律地位——業(yè)主們的民主期待[J];法制與社會(huì);2008年01期

4 孫權(quán);夏陽(yáng);;業(yè)主、業(yè)主委員會(huì)和物業(yè)服務(wù)企業(yè)三者關(guān)系之研究[J];法制與社會(huì);2008年01期

5 胡紅林;;物業(yè)服務(wù)合同法律問(wèn)題研究[J];法制與社會(huì);2009年03期

6 章水仙;臺(tái)灣、香港、大陸三地業(yè)主自治機(jī)構(gòu)之比較[J];廣東青年干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2004年04期

7 柳經(jīng)緯;尹臘梅;;民法上的抗辯與抗辯權(quán)[J];廈門(mén)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2007年02期

8 洪華芬;;論業(yè)主自治管理制度之完善[J];浙江教育學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2005年06期

本文編號(hào)：1998253