本文關(guān)鍵詞： 離婚協(xié)議 財(cái)產(chǎn)贈(zèng)與 撤銷　出處：《西南政法大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：《中華人民共和國(guó)合同法》（以下簡(jiǎn)稱《合同法》）第186條第1款規(guī)定：“贈(zèng)與人在贈(zèng)與財(cái)產(chǎn)的權(quán)利轉(zhuǎn)移之前可以撤銷贈(zèng)與�！钡�2款規(guī)定：“具有救災(zāi)、扶貧等社會(huì)公益、道德義務(wù)性質(zhì)的贈(zèng)與合同或者經(jīng)過(guò)公證的贈(zèng)與合同，不適用前款規(guī)定。”該法律條文規(guī)定贈(zèng)與合同若非經(jīng)過(guò)公證、或者具有救災(zāi)、扶貧等社會(huì)公益、道德義務(wù)性質(zhì)，贈(zèng)與人在贈(zèng)與財(cái)產(chǎn)的權(quán)利轉(zhuǎn)移之前均可撤銷。對(duì)于離婚協(xié)議中雙方約定夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)贈(zèng)與子女的條款能否撤銷的問(wèn)題，立法及相關(guān)司法解釋中并未作出明確規(guī)定。理論界和實(shí)務(wù)界對(duì)于“財(cái)產(chǎn)贈(zèng)與條款”能否撤銷也有兩種爭(zhēng)議較大的觀點(diǎn)。審判實(shí)踐中也未有統(tǒng)一的裁判意見。本文以案例為探討模本，從對(duì)贈(zèng)與可撤銷及贈(zèng)與不可撤銷兩種爭(zhēng)議觀點(diǎn)的比較分析的基礎(chǔ)上，對(duì)案例引發(fā)的焦點(diǎn)問(wèn)題進(jìn)行研究探討，以求有益于日后的審判實(shí)務(wù)中裁判標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的統(tǒng)一，并達(dá)到真正維護(hù)雙方當(dāng)事人的合法權(quán)益的目的。 本文除引言外分為五個(gè)部分：第一部分介紹原告王小某訴被告王某贈(zèng)與合同糾紛案例的概況并歸納案例的焦點(diǎn)。第二部分主要圍繞爭(zhēng)議焦點(diǎn)概括理論界和實(shí)務(wù)界中贈(zèng)與可撤銷及贈(zèng)與不可撤銷兩種爭(zhēng)議較大的觀點(diǎn)及各自的理論依據(jù)。第三部分首先通過(guò)對(duì)贈(zèng)與可撤銷及贈(zèng)與不可撤銷兩種爭(zhēng)議觀點(diǎn)的比較分析，指出兩種觀點(diǎn)各自存的在片面性。其次，筆者根據(jù)現(xiàn)有理論及實(shí)務(wù)現(xiàn)狀進(jìn)行分析，依據(jù)案例，從探析出發(fā)，，著力分析了贈(zèng)與合同的性質(zhì)、贈(zèng)與合同成立要件、共有人對(duì)共有財(cái)產(chǎn)的共同處分及贈(zèng)與撤銷后的救濟(jì)途徑即離婚協(xié)議中設(shè)定違約責(zé)任等問(wèn)題，得出筆者意見：男女雙方在離婚協(xié)議中約定夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)歸未成年子女所有的“財(cái)產(chǎn)贈(zèng)與條款”系雙方對(duì)其共同財(cái)產(chǎn)作出共同贈(zèng)與的意思表示，由于子女一方并未作出接受贈(zèng)與的意思表示，贈(zèng)與合同不成立，贈(zèng)與人可撤銷贈(zèng)與的意思表示。并指出贈(zèng)與可撤銷的例外情況即：將夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)歸未成年子女所有的作為撫養(yǎng)費(fèi)折抵的財(cái)產(chǎn)贈(zèng)與，在贈(zèng)與財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)利尚未轉(zhuǎn)移前，單方不能任意撤銷。第四部分理論聯(lián)系實(shí)際，結(jié)合案情進(jìn)行綜合分析，對(duì)涉及本案處理有關(guān)法律問(wèn)題的進(jìn)一步研究，提出筆者建議將夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)贈(zèng)與子女的贈(zèng)與約定在調(diào)解書中予以確認(rèn)，以維護(hù)誠(chéng)實(shí)信用及公平正義的原則，也避免了當(dāng)事人的訟累，并對(duì)其實(shí)施的可能性、現(xiàn)實(shí)性、共同財(cái)產(chǎn)贈(zèng)與約定的性質(zhì)、審判事務(wù)中具體操作的方式等問(wèn)題一一進(jìn)行了初探。第五部分回歸案例，概述了本案的處理方式。
[Abstract]:Article 186, paragraph 1, of the contract Law of the people's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as "contract Law") provides that "the donator may revoke the gift before the transfer of the right to grant property..." the second paragraph states: "there shall be a public good such as disaster relief, poverty alleviation, etc.," The provisions of the preceding paragraph shall not apply to a donation contract of a moral obligation nature or a notarized gift contract. "the provisions of the law stipulate that if the donation contract is not notarized, or if it is not notarized, or if it is of a public good such as disaster relief or poverty alleviation, it shall be of a moral obligation," The donator may revoke the gift before the transfer of the right to grant the property. As for the question of whether the provisions of the divorce agreement between the two parties to the spouses' joint property can be revoked, There are two controversial views in theory and practice on whether the property grant clause can be revoked. There is also no unified judgment opinion in trial practice. A case study model, On the basis of the comparative analysis of the two controversial viewpoints on the revocation of gifts and irrevocable gifts, this paper makes a study on the focal issues caused by cases in order to benefit the unification of judgment standards in judicial practice in the future. And to truly safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of both parties. This article is divided into five parts in addition to the introduction: the first part introduces the general situation of Wang Xiaomou plaintiff v. defendant Wang Mou gift contract dispute case and induces the focus of the case. The second part mainly generalizes the theoretical circle and practice around the dispute focus. In the third part, the author compares and analyzes the two controversial viewpoints on the revocability and irrevocability of the gift and the irrevocability of the gift in the world, and their respective theoretical basis. The third part makes a comparative analysis of the two controversial viewpoints, namely, the revocable gift and the irrevocable gift. The author points out that the two viewpoints exist in one-sidedness. Secondly, according to the existing theory and practice, the author analyzes the nature of the gift contract and the requirements for the establishment of the gift contract according to the case study. The joint disposition of the joint property of the joint owner and the relief channels after the revocation, that is, the establishment of the liability for breach of contract in the divorce agreement, etc., The author's opinion: in the divorce agreement, both men and women agreed that the "property grant clause" in which the couple's common property belongs to their minor children, is the meaning of the two parties to make a joint gift to their common property. As the child did not make the intention to accept the gift, the gift contract was not established. The meaning of the donation may be revoked by the donator. The exception to the revocable gift is that the gift of the property to which the joint property of the husband and wife belongs to the minor children as alimony shall be donated before the transfer of the right to grant the property, Unilateral parties cannot arbitrarily withdraw. 4th part of the theory combined with practice, combined with the case for a comprehensive analysis of the case involving the handling of related legal issues further research, The author suggests that the agreement on the gift of the couple's common property to their children be confirmed in the mediation statement, so as to maintain the principles of good faith and fairness and justice, and also avoid the litigants' tiredness, and the possibility and reality of its implementation. This paper probes into the nature of the agreement of the common property gift and the way of the concrete operation in the trial affairs, etc. The 5th part returns the case, and summarizes the handling method of the case.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：D923.9;D923.6

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 黃立林;;也談離婚調(diào)解協(xié)議中房產(chǎn)贈(zèng)與約定——與楊慧文、郭曉菊商榷[J];長(zhǎng)白學(xué)刊;2010年06期

2 楊立新;;最高人民法院《關(guān)于適用〈婚姻法〉若干問(wèn)題的解釋(三)》的民法基礎(chǔ)[J];法律適用;2011年10期

3 劉雁兵;蔡偉雄;;離婚協(xié)議或法院離婚調(diào)解書中約定贈(zèng)與他人財(cái)產(chǎn)的司法爭(zhēng)議及處理[J];湖北警官學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2011年03期

4 陳剛;;離婚協(xié)議中贈(zèng)與條款的性質(zhì)及其對(duì)贈(zèng)與能否撤銷的影響[J];惠州學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2012年04期

5 王竹青;薛峰;;淺析附離婚條件的財(cái)產(chǎn)分割協(xié)議[J];人民司法;2010年13期

6 李靜;;離婚協(xié)議中的贈(zèng)與能否撤銷[J];人民司法;2010年22期

7 薛寧蘭;許莉;;我國(guó)夫妻財(cái)產(chǎn)制立法若干問(wèn)題探討[J];法學(xué)論壇;2011年02期

8 常淑靜;趙軍蒙;;離婚協(xié)議中房產(chǎn)贈(zèng)與條款的性質(zhì)及效力[J];山東審判;2011年04期

9 趙江勇;淺談贈(zèng)與合同的撤銷權(quán)[J];山西高等學(xué)校社會(huì)科學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2003年01期

10 楊大文;;略論婚姻法及其適用的價(jià)值取向——兼析婚姻法司法解釋(三)草案第六條[J];中華女子學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2011年02期

本文編號(hào)：1523836