本文選題：合同附隨義務 + 合同給付義務�。� 參考：《南京大學》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：合同附隨義務是指在合同履行過程中,伴隨合同發(fā)展情形雙方當事人為保護相對方人身和財產利益,基于誠信原則并根據(jù)合同性質、目的、交易習慣等應當承擔的給付義務之外的義務。合同附隨義務的認定是責任判定和承擔的前提。對于附隨義務在個案中的認定,一直以來是實踐中的一個重要難題,在我國司法實踐中,法院對合同附隨義務的適用做了有意義的探索,但對該義務的理解和適用還處于比較淺顯的階段。通過研究典型案例,筆者發(fā)現(xiàn),合同附隨義務在司法認定過程中存在的最突出的問題是認定失當,法官往往將附隨義務與主給付義務、從給付義務以及安全保障義務混淆。整體來看,我國學者對合同附隨義務的理論研究尚不成熟,還有很多爭議之處。我國合同法第60條第2款引入了該制度,為附隨義務的認定提供了法律依據(jù),但因其籠統(tǒng)和抽象性,司法認定中更多依賴法官的自由裁量,而司法裁判過程中沒有建立一套裁量原則和認定方法。 具體來看,合同附隨義務和主給付義務的混淆的原因有：理論界對合同附隨義務的法源基礎認識不統(tǒng)一,合同法第60條第2款對附隨義務的規(guī)定較為籠統(tǒng),而且司法認定過程中普遍存在將經當事人約定的附隨義務上升為合同主給付義務的處理辦法。由于合同附隨義務與從給付義務都是誠實信用原則派生的義務形式,在不確定性等諸多方面具有一定的相似性,因此,如何區(qū)分合同附隨義務和從給付義務是相對更困難的實踐問題。理論和實踐中對該問題的處理尚沒有完備之策,筆者嘗試提出一種解決思路,將合同附隨義務設定為僅保護當事人的固有利益,從而與以給付利益實現(xiàn)為目標的從給付義務在理論上厘清界限。 合同附隨義務通過保護合同當事人履行利益之外的人身和財產利益,實現(xiàn)維護合同關系當事人正當權益,維護交易安全和秩序,保障社會經濟的良性高效運轉和實現(xiàn)社會正義的價值目標。在現(xiàn)有合同法體系下,利用已有的司法經驗與學術總結,將附隨義務在不同合同領域、行為模式下的不同義務加以分析,提出一個相對統(tǒng)一的認定準則和方法是當務之急。司法實踐中,合同附隨義務的認定要遵循密切聯(lián)系原則、利益衡量原則、嚴格限制原則。具體來講,就債權人提起的要求對方承擔某項義務的訴求,法官應當現(xiàn)審查合同內容是否有相關約定,并依據(jù)誠信原則判斷是否成立附隨義務；在沒有具體合同條款約定的情形下,檢索相關法規(guī),尋找法律依據(jù)；在沒有合同約定和法律規(guī)定時,依據(jù)誠信原則,結合合同性質、目的,參照行業(yè)習慣或是雙方之間特有的交易習慣判斷該義務是否成立。
[Abstract]:Contract collateral obligation means that in the process of contract performance, in order to protect the personal and property interests of the opposite party, the parties concerned are based on the principle of good faith, according to the nature and purpose of the contract, in order to protect the personal and property interests of the opposite party. Trading habits and other obligations beyond the obligation to pay. The confirmation of contract collateral obligation is the premise of responsibility judgment and undertaking. The determination of collateral obligation in cases has always been an important problem in practice. In the judicial practice of our country, the court has made a meaningful exploration on the application of contract collateral obligation. However, the understanding and application of this obligation is still in a relatively simple stage. Through the study of typical cases, the author finds that the most prominent problem of the contract collateral obligation in the course of judicial cognizance is the improper identification. The judge often confuses the collateral obligation with the principal obligation, the obligation of payment and the obligation of safety and security. On the whole, the theoretical research on the collateral obligation of contract is not mature, and there are still many controversies. The second paragraph of Article 60 of the contract Law of our country has introduced the system, which provides the legal basis for the confirmation of collateral obligation, but because of its generality and abstractness, the judicial determination depends more on the discretion of the judge. However, there is not a set of discretion principle and determination method in the process of judicial adjudication. Specifically, the confusion between contract collateral obligation and principal payment obligation is due to the fact that the theoretical circle has different understanding of the legal basis of contract collateral obligation, and the stipulation of collateral obligation in Article 60 (2) of contract Law is more general. In the process of judicial cognizance, there is a way to change the collateral obligation agreed by the parties to the obligation of the principal payment of the contract. Because the contract collateral obligation and the obligation to pay from the contract are both forms of obligations derived from the principle of good faith, there are certain similarities in many aspects, such as uncertainty, etc. How to distinguish the contract collateral obligation from the slave obligation is a more difficult practical problem. In theory and practice, there is not a complete way to deal with this problem. The author tries to put forward a way to solve the problem, and set the contract collateral obligation as only protecting the inherent interests of the parties. Therefore, it clarifies the theoretical boundary with the obligation to pay in order to realize the benefit of giving. By protecting the personal and property interests other than the interests of the parties to the contract, the obligations attached to the contract realize the protection of the legitimate rights and interests of the parties to the contract, and the maintenance of the security and order of the transactions, To ensure the healthy and efficient operation of the social economy and to achieve the value of social justice. Under the existing contract law system, it is urgent to analyze the different obligations under different contract fields and behavior patterns by using the existing judicial experience and academic summary, and to put forward a relatively uniform criterion and method of confirmation. In judicial practice, the confirmation of contract collateral obligation should follow the principle of close relation, interest measurement and strict restriction. Specifically, as to the creditor's claim that the other party should undertake a certain obligation, the judge should now examine whether there is a relevant agreement in the content of the contract, and judge whether the collateral obligation is established according to the principle of good faith; In the absence of specific contractual provisions, search for relevant laws and regulations and seek legal basis; when there is no contractual agreement or legal provision, in accordance with the principle of good faith, in combination with the nature and purpose of the contract, Judge whether the obligation is valid by reference to trade practices or specific trading habits between the parties.
【學位授予單位】：南京大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D923.6

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 張明正;;契約附隨義務的認定與歸責[J];研究生法學;2011年04期

2 費安玲;論合同法中的附隨義務[J];當代司法;1999年09期

3 錢玉林;締約過失責任與誠信原則的適用[J];法律科學.西北政法學院學報;1999年04期

4 汪躍平;論誠實信用與合同義務的道德化[J];太原師范學院學報(社會科學版);2004年04期

5 道文;試析合同法上的附隨義務[J];法學;1999年10期

6 劉力;附隨義務三題——以審判實踐為中心兼及對理論之檢討[J];法學;2005年11期

7 徐勇,栗建華;高蒂爾:協(xié)議而致道德的契約理論[J];國外社會科學;1998年02期

8 張馳,鮑治;附隨義務論[J];華東政法學院學報;1999年06期

9 張新寶,唐青林;經營者對服務場所的安全保障義務[J];法學研究;2003年03期

10 北岳;法律義務的合理性依據(jù)[J];法學研究;1996年05期

相關碩士學位論文 前2條

1 田陽;合同附隨義務理論與實踐研究[D];四川大學;2005年

2 宋慧青;誠實信用原則適用研究[D];鄭州大學;2007年

，

本文編號：2086000