本文選題：對賭協(xié)議　切入點：附條件的合同　出處：《南京大學》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：本文共分三章。第一章是問題的提出。筆者根據兩大經典案例指出對賭協(xié)議裁判理念的變化。案例一為"海富投資案",其經典意義在于該案是對賭協(xié)議首次進入司法領域,也正是學界和實務界探討對賭協(xié)議的開端(也是爭議的開端)。案例二是"瑞諷投資案",其經典意義在于,法院不僅跳出了傳統(tǒng)民事合同的審裁思維,更是明確的提出了審判對賭協(xié)議的四大原則。對賭協(xié)議的裁判理念之所以會發(fā)生上述轉變,是因為學界和實務界對對賭協(xié)議性質的認識與解讀已更為深入、準確。本文就是要揭示該種裁判理念發(fā)展的歷程,從而推演出對賭協(xié)議的本質及與之適應的裁判理念。第二章分為三個小節(jié),主要是論證對賭協(xié)議不適應傳統(tǒng)的裁判理念,這也是為何"海富投資案"審判結果不一且爭議不斷的原因。其中第一節(jié)立足于對賭協(xié)議自身,抽出對賭協(xié)議的核心條款"不確定條件",對其進行種類和性質的探析。第二節(jié)則是將傳統(tǒng)民法中對"附條件的合同"的定義與對賭協(xié)議中的"不確定條件"進行對比,結合王澤鑒等人的理論兩相對比之后,得出結論:包含"不確定條件"的對賭協(xié)議與傳統(tǒng)民法的"附條件的合同"是兩個不同的概念。第三節(jié)則是在發(fā)現(xiàn)對賭協(xié)議既不能以附條件合同簡單審裁,又不能一概而論認定非法的情況下,得出對賭協(xié)議為司法界的審判帶來了實質性障礙的結論。第三章就是探討如何解決上述審判思維障礙,換言之就是在對賭協(xié)議不適應傳統(tǒng)傳統(tǒng)裁判理念的前提下,對其裁判理念的再探討。本章同樣分為三小節(jié),第一小節(jié)從對賭協(xié)議產生的理論基礎和其現(xiàn)實意義的角度論證其為典型的商事合同。第二小節(jié)歸納了"海富投資案"后,我國各地各級法院歷年來有關對賭協(xié)議的審判方式,從中總結出法院審判的趨勢及其合理性。最后一節(jié)則是根據對賭協(xié)議的本質特征以及法院實操的合理性探析個案中應如何把握對賭協(xié)議的審判原則。本文的最后是本文的結論,即對賭協(xié)議作為附條件的商事合同,應賦予意思自治更大的寬容度,從而加以審裁。
[Abstract]:This paper is divided into three chapters.The first chapter is the proposal of the problem.According to two classic cases, the author points out the change of the concept of gambling agreement referee.Case one is "Haifu Investment case", the classical meaning of which is that this case is the first time that the gambling agreement has entered the judicial field, and it is also the beginning (and the beginning of the dispute) of the academic and practical circles to discuss the gambling agreement.The classic meaning of the case is that the court not only jumped out of the traditional civil contract adjudication thinking, but also put forward the four principles of the trial and gambling agreement.The reason for the above change is that scholars and practitioners have a deeper and more accurate understanding of the nature of gambling agreements.This paper is to reveal the course of the development of this kind of referee idea, and then deduce the essence of the gambling agreement and the judgment idea adapted to it.The second chapter is divided into three sections, mainly to demonstrate that the gambling agreement does not adapt to the traditional concept of the referee, which is why the "Haifu Investment case" trial results are different and controversial reasons.The first section is based on the gambling agreement itself, draws out the core clause of the gambling agreement "uncertainty conditions", and analyzes its kind and nature.The second section is to compare the definition of "conditional contract" in the traditional civil law with the "uncertain condition" in the gambling agreement, combined with the theory of Wang Zejian and others.The conclusion is that the gambling agreement containing "uncertain conditions" is different from the "conditional contract" in the traditional civil law.The third section is to find that the gambling agreement can not be simply adjudicated by conditional contract, nor can it be found to be illegal in a general way. The conclusion is that the gambling agreement has brought substantial obstacles to the trial of judicial circles.The third chapter is to discuss how to solve the above obstacles of judicial thinking, in other words, under the premise that the gambling agreement does not adapt to the traditional judgment idea, the author discusses the judgment idea again.This chapter is also divided into three sections. The first section demonstrates that the gambling agreement is a typical commercial contract from the theoretical basis and its practical significance.In the second section, after "Haifu Investment case", the court at all levels of our country over the years about the trial of gambling agreement, summed up the trend of court trial and its reasonableness.The last section is based on the essential characteristics of the gambling agreement and the reasonableness of the court practice how to grasp the trial principle of the gambling agreement in the case.The last part of this paper is the conclusion of this paper, that is, the gambling agreement as a condition of commercial contracts, should be given greater tolerance of autonomy of will, so as to adjudicate.
【學位授予單位】：南京大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D922.287
，

本文編號：1682324