【摘要】：對(duì)合同信賴?yán)娴仃P(guān)注和研究是商品經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展水平的重要標(biāo)志,體現(xiàn)了由靜態(tài)的財(cái)產(chǎn)關(guān)系向動(dòng)態(tài)的財(cái)產(chǎn)關(guān)系轉(zhuǎn)變的時(shí)代法精神。德國學(xué)者耶林,最先對(duì)合同信賴?yán)孢M(jìn)行研究,其創(chuàng)設(shè)的締約過失責(zé)任理論開創(chuàng)了先河。美國學(xué)者富勒,繼承、發(fā)展了他的學(xué)說,進(jìn)一步探討了合同信賴?yán)娴馁r償范圍以及賠償限額問題,并在1937年首次明確提出了合同信賴?yán)娴母拍睢?合同信賴?yán)媸侵冈谝环疆?dāng)事人在合同訂立全過程直至合同生效前的各個(gè)階段所固有的,因合理信賴合同有效成立或履行所獲得的財(cái)產(chǎn)利益和機(jī)會(huì)利益。其獨(dú)特的法律性質(zhì),使之區(qū)別于傳統(tǒng)的合同責(zé)任和侵權(quán)責(zé)任二元理論。一方面,合同信賴?yán)嫱黄屏藗鹘y(tǒng)的違約責(zé)任,是否存在有效的合同形式不再是其產(chǎn)生的先決條件,相對(duì)人因合理信賴即可能獲得或者已經(jīng)獲得利益。另一方面,在構(gòu)成要件上,合同信賴?yán)娉尸F(xiàn)出了即融合又區(qū)別于合同責(zé)任與侵權(quán)責(zé)任的特性：首先,要有違反先合同義務(wù)的行為；其次,須有損害事實(shí)；再次要求行為人主觀上存在過錯(cuò)；最后,須違反先合同義務(wù)的行為與損害事實(shí)之間存在因果關(guān)系。完備的構(gòu)成要件不僅是認(rèn)識(shí)合同信賴?yán)娴幕A(chǔ),也是確定合同信賴?yán)鎿p害賠償限額的判定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。 在德國,合同信賴?yán)嬉话闶亲鳛榫喖s過失責(zé)任的法律后果存在的,對(duì)合同信賴?yán)娴谋Ｗo(hù)主要是通過締約過失責(zé)任來實(shí)現(xiàn)的。而與德國不同,在美國則可通過違約責(zé)任得到救濟(jì)。雖然相差各異的法律文化,決定了兩個(gè)國家各自不同的理論構(gòu)建。但是其產(chǎn)生的理論基礎(chǔ),所追求的價(jià)值理念,法律制度的建設(shè)應(yīng)當(dāng)是一致的。兩者間個(gè)性中共性地融合交匯,為我國合同信賴?yán)娣杀Ｗo(hù)制度的完善提供了積極的借鑒范本。 我國對(duì)合同信賴?yán)娴谋Ｗo(hù)規(guī)定主要散見于《民法通則》和《合同法》中。但由于缺乏成熟的理論支撐,加之對(duì)西方法律制度地粗糙移植,造成了立法與實(shí)踐相互脫節(jié)的局面。比如,在合同信賴?yán)娴臉?gòu)成要件方面,立法只是將其限定為主觀故意,忽視了過失情形下的合同信賴?yán)姹Ｗo(hù)。對(duì)合同信賴?yán)娴倪m用情形,賠償范圍,賠償限額等問題亦缺乏明確的標(biāo)準(zhǔn),嚴(yán)重制約了司法務(wù)實(shí)地可操作性。對(duì)此,我們應(yīng)當(dāng)以更加包容的心態(tài)去接納西方的法律制度,積極借鑒并結(jié)合我國實(shí)際,取其精華去其糟粕。不僅需要在理論上加強(qiáng)研究,而且著重從立法上逐步完善：明確合同信賴?yán)娴母拍罴柏S富其構(gòu)成要件,擴(kuò)大合同信賴?yán)娴倪m用范圍,明合同信賴?yán)娴馁r償范圍和限額等。必要時(shí)可引入優(yōu)勢(shì)證據(jù)規(guī)則,完善舉證責(zé)任制度。多角度分析、借鑒,才能不斷地推進(jìn)我國合同信賴?yán)娣杀Ｗo(hù)制度地進(jìn)步。
[Abstract]:It is an important sign of the level of commodity economy to pay close attention to and study the contract trust interest, which embodies the spirit of the times law which changes from the static property relation to the dynamic property relation. Jering, a German scholar, first studied the trust interest of contract, and his theory of fault liability in contracting was the first. Fuller, an American scholar, inherited and developed his theory, further discussed the scope and limitation of contract reliance interest, and put forward the concept of contract trust interest for the first time in 1937. Contract reliance interest refers to the property interest and opportunity interest acquired by a party during the whole process of contract conclusion until before the contract becomes effective, which is obtained from the effective formation or performance of a reasonable trust contract. Its unique legal nature distinguishes it from the traditional dual theory of contract liability and tort liability. On the one hand, the reliance interest of contract breaks through the traditional liability for breach of contract, whether there is an effective form of contract is no longer a prerequisite for its production, and the relative party may or has already obtained the benefit because of reasonable trust. On the other hand, the contract trust interest shows the characteristics of merging and differentiating from the contract liability and tort liability: firstly, the act of violating the prior contract obligation, secondly, the fact of damage; Finally, there is a causal relationship between the act of violating the obligation of prior contract and the fact of damage. The complete elements are not only the basis of understanding the contract trust interest, but also the criterion of determining the limit of contract trust interest damage compensation. In Germany, the contract trust interest usually exists as the legal consequence of the contract fault liability, and the protection of the contract trust interest is mainly realized through the contract fault liability. Unlike Germany, liability for breach of contract is available in the United States. Although the different legal culture, decided the two countries different theoretical construction. But the theoretical basis, the value concept and the construction of legal system should be consistent. It provides a positive model for the perfection of the legal protection system of contract trust interest in our country. The protection of contract trust interests in China is mainly scattered in the General principles of Civil Law and contract Law. However, due to the lack of mature theoretical support, coupled with the rough transplantation of western legal system, legislation and practice are divorced from each other. For example, in terms of the constitutive elements of contract reliance interest, the legislation only limits it to subjective intent and neglects the contract trust interest protection under the circumstance of negligence. The application of contract trust interest, the scope of compensation and the limitation of compensation are also lack of clear standard, which seriously restricts the practical operation of judicature. In this regard, we should accept the western legal system with a more tolerant attitude, actively draw lessons from and combine with the reality of our country, and take its essence to the dregs. It is necessary not only to strengthen the research in theory, but also to gradually perfect the legislation: to clarify the concept of contract trust interest and enrich its constituent elements, to expand the scope of application of contract trust interest, and to clarify the compensation scope and limitation of contract trust interest. If necessary, we can introduce superior evidence rules and perfect the system of burden of proof. Only through multi-angle analysis and reference, can we promote the progress of legal protection system of contract trust interest in our country.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：中國海洋大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：D923.6

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 馬新彥;信賴與信賴?yán)婵糩J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2000年03期

2 朱廣新;;信賴保護(hù)理論及其研究述評(píng)[J];法商研究;2007年06期

3 韓世遠(yuǎn);;我國合同法中的締約上過失問題研究[J];法學(xué)家;2004年03期

4 葉金強(qiáng);;論中斷磋商的賠償責(zé)任[J];法學(xué);2010年03期

5 齊云穎;;民法對(duì)信賴?yán)鎿p害的保護(hù)[J];法制與社會(huì);2008年20期

6 鮑家志;盤佳;;論合同信賴?yán)娴膿p害賠償[J];廣西大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2010年05期

7 Q糜剿，

本文編號(hào)：2405978