本文選題：權利沖突 + 人格權　； 參考：《山東大學》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：人格權與身份權是民法學界一直探討的權利,而由人格權與身份權產(chǎn)生的權利沖突也一直是司法中的熱點問題�；橐鲫P系中的各項權利沖突比起民法關系中的權利沖突處理起來更加復雜,因為夫妻關系的親密性、倫理性、道德性,使得權利實現(xiàn)的限制更多,范圍更狹窄。夫妻作為一個家庭通�？闯墒且粋�權利主體,所以夫妻間各自權利保護的難度也加大。隱私權僅憲法中做了基礎性規(guī)定,而對于性自主權、同居權、生育權在婚姻法中甚至沒有明確的提法,解決這種權利沖突更多時候是無明確法律可依。本文主要以四個部分來探討以婚姻關系為中心的人格權與身份權的沖突以及解決。第一部分,闡述婚姻關系中人格權與身份權的權利沖突的具體概念及特殊性,并對婚姻關系中人格權與身份權進行界定,指出人格權與身份權既相互聯(lián)系又互相區(qū)別,由此挖掘出其性質的不同。同時,對于婚姻關系中三對主要沖突進行概述,筆者認為,婚姻關系中性自主權、隱私權以及女性生育權屬于人格權范疇,配偶知情權、同居權、男性生育權屬于身份權范疇。第二部分,究其本質。揭露權利沖突背后的實質即利益的沖突,而利益則是由經(jīng)濟基礎決定的,同時,從歷史發(fā)展與制度本身找出人格權與身份權沖突的原因。一方面是由于人文主義的發(fā)展,法律關系從身份到契約再到身份的變化,另一方面是法律本身對權利沖突界定的模糊性。第三部分,提出協(xié)調人格權與身份權沖突的法理性原則,并結合婚姻關系的特點進行分析。立法層面上,尊重位階原則,以人格利益為本位的權利要優(yōu)于以身份利益為本位的權利。司法層面上要采取經(jīng)濟性原則的方法,權利最大化原則,保證權利實現(xiàn)的社會價值和公平正義。同時,在執(zhí)行過程中嚴格遵循比例原則,將一方的侵害程度與另一方的重要性作比較。窮盡其它原則后,可以適用公序良俗原則得到較為公正合理的結果。第四部分,具體闡釋婚姻關系中最常沖突的三種矛盾的解決路徑。第一,隱私權與配偶知情權,分析隱私權與配偶知情權的范圍以及性質,配偶隱私權與知情權與一般民法意義上的權利的區(qū)別,對于隱私權優(yōu)于配偶知情權,配偶知情權優(yōu)于隱私權兩種情況作具體分析。第二,性自主權與配偶同居權,分析性自主權與同居權的含義,對法學界熱點婚內強奸——同居權濫用的案例進行解析,同時借鑒國外立法的一些規(guī)定,總結出既能保護性自主權也能保護同居權的解決方法。第三,夫妻間生育權之間的矛盾,指出生育權的含義和性質,對生育權的同質沖突進行具體探究,進而得出生育權不是夫或妻單獨享有的一個權利,而是共同共有一個權利外觀的結論,列舉每一種沖突的不同情況,得出使得生育權配置最大化最合理的解決方案。提出生育權優(yōu)化配置的合理化建議。
[Abstract]:The right of personality and the right of identity are always discussed in the field of civil law, and the conflict between the right of personality and the right of identity has always been a hot issue in the administration of justice. The conflict of rights in marriage is more complicated than the conflict of rights in civil law, because the intimacy, ethics and morality of the relationship between husband and wife make the realization of rights more limited and narrower. Husband and wife as a family is usually regarded as a subject of rights, so it is more difficult to protect their respective rights. The right to privacy is only a basic provision in the Constitution, but there is no explicit reference to the right of sexual autonomy, cohabitation and reproductive rights in the marriage law. More often than not, there is no clear law to be followed to resolve the conflict of such rights. This paper mainly discusses the conflict and solution of personality right and identity right centered on marriage relationship in four parts. The first part expounds the specific concept and particularity of the conflict between personality right and identity right in marriage relationship, and defines personality right and identity right in marriage relationship, and points out that personality right and identity right are interrelated and different from each other. From this, the nature of the excavation of the difference. At the same time, three major conflicts in the marriage relationship are summarized. The author thinks that the marriage relationship neutral autonomy, the privacy right and the female reproductive right belong to the personality right category, the spouse right to know, the cohabitation right, the male reproductive right belongs to the status right category. The second part investigates its essence. The essence of the conflict of rights is the conflict of interests, which is determined by the economic basis. At the same time, from the historical development and the system itself to find out the conflict between personality rights and identity rights. On the one hand, due to the development of humanism, the legal relationship changes from identity to contract to identity, on the other hand, the law itself defines the conflict of rights. In the third part, the author puts forward the principle of legal rationality to coordinate the conflict between personality right and identity right, and analyzes the characteristics of marriage relationship. At the legislative level, respect the principle of rank, and the right based on personality interests should be superior to the rights based on identity interests. At the judicial level, we should adopt the method of economic principle, the principle of maximization of rights, guarantee the social value of realization of rights and fairness and justice. At the same time, according to the principle of proportionality, the degree of infringement is compared with the importance of the other. After exhausting other principles, the principle of public order and good custom can be applied to obtain fair and reasonable results. The fourth part, explains the most frequent conflict in the marriage relationship three kinds of contradiction solution path. First, the right to privacy and spouse's right to know, analyzing the scope and nature of the right to privacy and spouse's right to know, and the difference between spouse's right to privacy and the right to know in the sense of general civil law, is superior to the right to know to the right to privacy. The spouse's right to know is superior to the right to privacy. Second, sexual autonomy and spouse cohabitation right, analysis of the meaning of sexual autonomy and cohabitation right, analysis of the law hot marital rape-cohabitation right abuse cases, at the same time draw lessons from some foreign legislation. Summed up both the protection of autonomy and can protect the right to cohabitation solutions. Third, the contradiction between husband and wife's reproductive rights, pointing out the meaning and nature of reproductive rights, and making a specific study of the same quality conflict of reproductive rights, and then drawing the conclusion that reproductive rights are not a right enjoyed by husband or wife alone. Instead, the author concludes that there is a common appearance of rights, enumerates the different situations of each conflict, and obtains the most reasonable solution to maximize the allocation of reproductive rights. Put forward the rational suggestion of optimizing allocation of reproductive right.
【學位授予單位】：山東大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D923.9

【相似文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 鐘國才;張繼承;;身份權類型的理論認識與評價——基于類型化思維的思考[J];南昌大學學報(人文社會科學版);2010年05期

2 史浩明;論身份權[J];蘇州大學學報;2001年04期

3 孫艷,王瑞霞;身份概念解析[J];安徽警官職業(yè)學院學報;2003年S1期

4 張獻民,梁新平;身份權研究[J];南華大學學報(社會科學版);2004年02期

5 張雯;從契約到身份——現(xiàn)代身份權體系的重構[J];陜西省行政學院.陜西省經(jīng)濟管理干部學院學報;2004年03期

6 田麗華;;身份權的內涵和外延[J];法制與社會;2008年19期

7 楊康樂;;試論身份權的立法保護[J];法治研究;2008年08期

8 方樂坤;;論身份權的精神內涵[J];公民與法(法學版);2009年06期

9 郭鳴;;論親屬身份權的侵權法保護[J];江西社會科學;2010年03期

10 劉于良;;認真對待身份權——以身份權的存在基礎為視角[J];成都師范學院學報;2013年03期

相關會議論文 前2條

1 包學剛;;論現(xiàn)代民法的身份權本質——從身份含義考察出發(fā)[A];當代法學論壇（2011年第2輯）[C];2011年

2 張麗燕;;試論第三人侵害夫妻身份權的損害賠償——兼評我國婚姻法離婚過錯賠償制度[A];中國民商法實務論壇論文集[C];2001年

相關重要報紙文章 前3條

1 徐丙林;人身權、人格權與身份權的區(qū)別[N];江蘇經(jīng)濟報;2001年

2 ;維權法律知多少[N];湖北日報;2004年

3 河南省鄭州市中級人民法院 趙磊邋梁曉征;責任編輯在其編輯作品上署名問題的法律思考[N];人民法院報;2007年

相關博士學位論文 前1條

1 王琳琳;論私權及其體系化[D];吉林大學;2012年

相關碩士學位論文 前10條

1 楊立群;論婚姻關系中人格權與身份權的沖突[D];山東大學;2017年

2 宋揚;身份權基本理論研究[D];重慶大學;2008年

3 朱淼;論身份權的民法保護[D];河南大學;2007年

4 邢克國;侵害身份權法律制度研究[D];北京工商大學;2010年

5 鄭權;我國親屬身份權制度探究[D];吉林大學;2015年

6 謝紅;論羅馬法的身份制度和現(xiàn)代民法身份權[D];華東政法學院;2006年

7 龔仙鳳;公立高校學生身份權救濟研究[D];華東師范大學;2013年

8 趙亞飛;論現(xiàn)代民法對身份權的保護[D];湖南大學;2012年

9 包學剛;從身份權到派生人格權[D];貴州大學;2006年

10 程謙;論身份權的精神損害賠償[D];暨南大學;2010年

，

本文編號：1940235