【摘要】：“撤銷”是我國民法中出現(xiàn)頻率很高的一詞，其運(yùn)用于《合同法》中的債權(quán)人撤銷權(quán)時，定義為債權(quán)人對債務(wù)人所為的危害債權(quán)的行為，可請求人民法院撤銷債務(wù)人所為的行為以維持債務(wù)人責(zé)任財(cái)產(chǎn)保障債權(quán)實(shí)現(xiàn)的權(quán)利。 我國《合同法》首次明確規(guī)定了債權(quán)人撤銷權(quán)制度，填補(bǔ)了債法立法的一項(xiàng)空白。為了建立完善的債權(quán)人撤銷權(quán)制度，最高人民法院對《合同法》又做出了進(jìn)一步的解釋。該制度的建立和完善，突破了傳統(tǒng)的債的相對性原理，更好的保全了債權(quán)人的債權(quán)，很好的解決了實(shí)踐中長期大量存在的三角債、討債難的現(xiàn)象。隨著法律在實(shí)踐中的適用，案件的復(fù)雜性增加以致我國的規(guī)定開始有了一定的局限性和滯后性，在理論上也存在一些不合理的地方，對此有必要在學(xué)理上進(jìn)行補(bǔ)正。 本文的第一部分主要闡述債權(quán)人撤銷權(quán)的概況，包括：債權(quán)人撤銷權(quán)的沿革、在各國的發(fā)展，債權(quán)人撤銷權(quán)的性質(zhì)的四種學(xué)說，債權(quán)人撤銷權(quán)制度設(shè)立的理論基礎(chǔ)。 本文的第二部分，將債權(quán)人撤銷權(quán)分別于代位權(quán)、破產(chǎn)撤銷權(quán)，可撤銷合同撤銷權(quán)進(jìn)行比較，，目的在于解決學(xué)習(xí)撤銷權(quán)理論時可能出現(xiàn)的混淆。 本文第三部分是本文的核心章節(jié)，從債權(quán)人撤銷權(quán)構(gòu)成要件的三方面進(jìn)行闡述。債權(quán)人方面主要考慮債權(quán)人擁有的債權(quán)類型，以及債權(quán)與可撤銷行為的時間問題。債務(wù)人方面，主要在于客觀要件即詐害行為的構(gòu)成和主觀要件即債務(wù)人有詐害的意思。對于第三人方面，主要在于第三人的主觀上是否具有惡意。 本文第四部分討論了債權(quán)人撤銷權(quán)在行使上的特殊，行使的方式為訴訟，對于訴訟的性質(zhì)以及訴訟當(dāng)事人，筆者對比了四種學(xué)說。撤銷權(quán)的行使效果，行使范圍，以及行使期間也因不同的學(xué)說而有所區(qū)分。 第五部分總結(jié)了筆者對我國債權(quán)人撤銷權(quán)制度存在不足提出了見解并給出了改進(jìn)建議。
[Abstract]:"rescission" is a term that appears frequently in the civil law of our country. When it is applied to the creditor's right of rescission in contract Law, it is defined as the act of harming the creditor's rights to the debtor. The people's court may request the people's court to revoke the behavior of the debtor in order to maintain the right of the debtor's property to guarantee the realization of the creditor's rights. The contract Law of our country for the first time clearly stipulates the system of creditor's right of rescission, and fills in a blank in the legislation of debt law. In order to establish a perfect system of creditor's right of rescission, the Supreme people's Court has made a further explanation to contract Law. The establishment and perfection of this system broke through the principle of relativity of traditional debt, better preserved creditor's rights, and solved the problem of "triangle debt" which existed for a long time in practice and difficult to collect debts. With the application of law in practice, the complexity of cases increases, so that the provisions of our country began to have some limitations and lag, in theory there are some unreasonable places, it is necessary to make up for this in theory. The first part of this paper mainly expounds the general situation of creditor's right of rescission, including: the evolution of creditor's right of rescission, the development in various countries, the four theories of the nature of creditor's right of revocation, and the theoretical basis of the establishment of creditor's right of rescission. In the second part of this paper, the creditor's right of rescission is compared with the right of subrogation, the right of bankruptcy and the right of rescission of contract, in order to solve the confusion that may appear in the study of the theory of right of rescission. The third part of this paper is the core chapter of this paper, from the creditor rescission of the three aspects of the elements. Creditors mainly consider the types of claims owned by creditors, and the time between creditor's rights and revocable acts. The debtor mainly lies in the objective element, that is, the constitution of the act of fraud and the subjective element, that is, the debtor has the intention of fraud. For the third person, mainly lies in the third person's subjective malicious. In the fourth part of this paper, the author discusses the special exercise of the creditor's right of rescission, the way to exercise it is litigation, and the author compares four theories about the nature of litigation and the litigant. The effect, scope and duration of rescission are distinguished by different theories. The fifth part summarizes the author's opinion on the deficiency of the system of creditor's rescission right and puts forward some suggestions for improvement.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：中國社會科學(xué)院研究生院
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D923

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前4條

1 鄒海林;論我國合同法規(guī)定之債權(quán)人撤銷權(quán)[J];北京市政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2000年01期

2 郝麗娜;;破產(chǎn)撤銷權(quán)與民法撤銷權(quán)之辨析[J];法制與社會;2009年21期

3 尚清;;論債權(quán)人撤銷權(quán)的適用[J];商場現(xiàn)代化;2007年12期

4 申衛(wèi)星;論債權(quán)人撤銷權(quán)的構(gòu)成——兼評我國《合同法》74條[J];法制與社會發(fā)展;2000年02期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 賈莉萍;債權(quán)人撤銷權(quán)研究[D];南昌大學(xué);2006年

本文編號：2374484