本文選題：網(wǎng)絡(luò)約車 + 客運(yùn)合同��； 參考：《大連海事大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：隨著中國(guó)互聯(lián)網(wǎng)大數(shù)據(jù)技術(shù)的高速發(fā)展,"互聯(lián)網(wǎng)+交通"模式的共享經(jīng)濟(jì)理念逐漸興起,一時(shí)間,使用手機(jī)APP約車成為人們出行首要的選擇。2016年上半年,CNNIC發(fā)布的第38次《中國(guó)互聯(lián)網(wǎng)絡(luò)發(fā)展?fàn)顩r統(tǒng)計(jì)報(bào)告》顯示,網(wǎng)絡(luò)約車出租車用戶規(guī)模為1.59億人。2016年7月27日,交通部聯(lián)合公安部等七部門發(fā)布《網(wǎng)絡(luò)預(yù)約出租汽車經(jīng)營(yíng)服務(wù)管理暫行辦法》,首次官方承認(rèn)網(wǎng)約車模式合法,肯定了軟件平臺(tái)的合法地位。網(wǎng)絡(luò)約車這一新事物的出現(xiàn),確實(shí)為人們的出行提供了便利,滿足了市場(chǎng)差異化的需求,緩解了出行難題,但新鮮事物產(chǎn)生的法律問(wèn)題,也不得不值得我們?nèi)ニ伎肌Ｒ虼吮疚氖紫葘?duì)網(wǎng)絡(luò)約車合同做了一個(gè)概述,說(shuō)明網(wǎng)絡(luò)約車合同的訂立、特殊性及效力問(wèn)題,緊接著探討了網(wǎng)絡(luò)約車合同違約責(zé)任的構(gòu)成,涉及歸責(zé)原則、免責(zé)事由、違約形態(tài)以及損害賠償范圍,最后提出網(wǎng)絡(luò)約車合同違約責(zé)任的具體問(wèn)題和完善建議,從而使法律與社會(huì)發(fā)展相一致。具體從以下四個(gè)部分予以論述:第一部分為網(wǎng)絡(luò)約車合同概述,分析指出網(wǎng)約車客運(yùn)合同的性質(zhì),指出其特殊性所在,體現(xiàn)在要約與承諾角色互換,介入第三方平臺(tái)等方面,具體說(shuō)明了乘客、承運(yùn)人、居間人的權(quán)利義務(wù),為下文論述做鋪墊。第二部分介紹了網(wǎng)絡(luò)約車合同的違約責(zé)任,從歸責(zé)原則、免責(zé)事由、違約形態(tài)以及損失賠償范圍方面進(jìn)行研究,闡述在新型客運(yùn)合同中,適用過(guò)錯(cuò)責(zé)任原則的合理性,違約行為的四種形態(tài):給付不能,履行拒絕,給付遲延,積極侵害債權(quán)。除法定免責(zé)事由外,為了網(wǎng)約車的發(fā)展,建議雙方對(duì)某些特定事由約定免責(zé),指出損害賠償范圍包括直接損失和所失利益兩方面。第三部分指出網(wǎng)絡(luò)約車違約責(zé)任中的一些具體問(wèn)題,主要包括違約主體責(zé)任不對(duì)等;責(zé)任承擔(dān)方式單一;違約懲罰機(jī)制不健全。第四部分提出完善網(wǎng)絡(luò)約車違約責(zé)任的建議,針對(duì)第三部分的問(wèn)題具體分析,提出優(yōu)化責(zé)任雙方權(quán)利義務(wù)的設(shè)計(jì);拓寬違約責(zé)任的承擔(dān)方式,加強(qiáng)技術(shù)創(chuàng)新等建議。
[Abstract]:With the rapid development of Internet big data technology in China, the shared economy concept of "Internet traffic" mode has been rising gradually for a period of time. Using the mobile phone APP has become a top choice for people to travel. According to the 38th report on the Development of the Internet in China released in the first half of 2016, the number of taxi users on the Internet is 159 million. On July 27, 2016, The Ministry of Communications, together with the Ministry of Public Security and other seven departments, issued the "interim measures for the Management of Network booking Taxi Business Service", which for the first time officially recognized the legality of the network taxi rental mode, affirming the legal status of the software platform. The emergence of the new thing of network car ride really provides convenience for people to travel, meets the demand of market differentiation, alleviates the travel difficult problem, but the legal problem caused by new things, also has to be worth our thinking. Therefore, this paper first makes an overview of the network car charter contract, explains the conclusion, particularity and effectiveness of the network car charter contract, and then discusses the constitution of the breach liability of the network car charter contract, including the principle of imputation and the reason of exemption. The form of breach of contract and the scope of compensation for damages. Finally, the paper puts forward the specific problems and suggestions on the liability for breach of contract of network car charter contract, so as to make the law consistent with the development of society. The following four parts are discussed: the first part is an overview of the network car charter contract, the analysis points out the nature of the network passenger transport contract, and points out its particularity, which is reflected in the role exchange between offer and acceptance, the involvement of the third party platform, and so on. The rights and obligations of passengers, carriers and mediators are specified, laying the groundwork for the following discussion. The second part introduces the liability for breach of contract in the network car contract. It studies the principle of liability, the reason of exemption, the form of breach of contract and the scope of compensation for losses, and expounds the rationality of applying the principle of fault liability in the new type of passenger transport contract. Four forms of breach of contract: failure to pay, refusal to perform, delay in payment, and positive infringement of creditor's rights. In addition to the statutory reasons for exemption, it is suggested that both parties should agree on the exemption for certain specific reasons, pointing out that the scope of damages includes both direct losses and lost interests. The third part points out some specific problems in the liability for breach of contract in the network, mainly including the non-equivalence of the liability of the subject of breach of contract; the single way of assuming the responsibility; and the imperfect mechanism of punishment for breach of contract. In the fourth part, the author puts forward some suggestions to improve the liability of breach of contract on the network, analyzes the problems in the third part, and puts forward some suggestions, such as optimizing the design of the rights and obligations of both sides of the responsibility, widening the way of assuming the responsibility of breach of contract, and strengthening the technical innovation.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：大連海事大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D922.296

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 程宗璋;;合同違約責(zé)任的經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)分析[J];福建法學(xué);2000年01期

2 王賽;;訂單農(nóng)業(yè)合同違約問(wèn)題分析[J];現(xiàn)代商業(yè);2011年33期

3 吳著建;曹華;;合同違約的賠償與限制——一起合同索賠案例分析與思考[J];水利建設(shè)與管理;2004年03期

4 王賽芝,周朝霞;合同違約的經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)分析[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)師;2005年03期

5 王穎;;合同違約責(zé)任的經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)分析[J];財(cái)會(huì)月刊;2006年06期

6 生秀東;;訂單農(nóng)業(yè)的合同違約問(wèn)題新探[J];商場(chǎng)現(xiàn)代化;2006年36期

7 王愛群;夏英;秦穎;;農(nóng)業(yè)產(chǎn)業(yè)化經(jīng)營(yíng)中合同違約問(wèn)題的成因與控制[J];農(nóng)業(yè)經(jīng)濟(jì)問(wèn)題;2007年06期

8 ;如何處理合同違約?[J];法制與經(jīng)濟(jì)(上半月);2007年01期

9 姜大儒;;論合同違約主觀狀態(tài)的區(qū)分及其責(zé)任承擔(dān)[J];行政與法;2008年08期

10 方志林;代培合同違約糾紛案件的審理[J];人民司法;1994年02期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前10條

1 本報(bào)記者 閆磊;貸款買車小心踏入合同違約陷阱[N];經(jīng)濟(jì)參考報(bào);2010年

2 案例編寫人 江蘇省南京市秦淮區(qū)人民法院 王冬青 王小娣;拖欠撫養(yǎng)費(fèi)的合同違約責(zé)任[N];人民法院報(bào);2014年

3 ;對(duì)《是合同違約還是商標(biāo)侵權(quán)？》的討論[N];中國(guó)工商報(bào);2012年

4 江協(xié);騙銷、廣告摻假、合同違約為近期投訴熱點(diǎn)[N];中國(guó)消費(fèi)者報(bào);2000年

5 鮑雨;十種工程施工合同違約類型及責(zé)任承擔(dān)[N];中國(guó)建設(shè)報(bào);2007年

6 沈華;以政府行為抗辯合同違約責(zé)任之分析[N];江蘇法制報(bào);2007年

7 福建省南靖縣工商局 高 劍;本案應(yīng)屬于一般合同違約[N];中國(guó)工商報(bào);2005年

8 耿樹生;承攬方擅自銷售定做產(chǎn)品是否構(gòu)成商標(biāo)侵權(quán)？[N];中國(guó)工商報(bào);2011年

9 本報(bào)記者 劉旭;出口合同違約暗戰(zhàn)升級(jí)企業(yè)損失慘重[N];國(guó)際商報(bào);2009年

10 本報(bào)記者 張文章;擅自補(bǔ)卡致機(jī)主手機(jī)號(hào)碼被盜[N];中國(guó)消費(fèi)者報(bào);2011年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 牛稼;旅游合同違約精神損害賠償制度研究[D];首都經(jīng)濟(jì)貿(mào)易大學(xué);2015年

2 許亞紅;旅游合同違約精神損害賠償制度研究[D];河北大學(xué);2016年

3 韓云婷;網(wǎng)絡(luò)約車合同違約責(zé)任研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2017年

4 王艷玲;合同詐騙罪與合同違約之界限區(qū)分芻議[D];煙臺(tái)大學(xué);2013年

5 王穎;合同違約責(zé)任的經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)分析[D];武漢理工大學(xué);2002年

6 張麗娟;訂單農(nóng)業(yè)合同違約及預(yù)防研究[D];河南大學(xué);2011年

7 張智;訂單農(nóng)業(yè)合同違約的預(yù)防和糾紛解決研究[D];西南財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué);2014年

8 馬春莉;旅游合同違約時(shí)間浪費(fèi)賠償制度研究[D];上海交通大學(xué);2012年

9 王艷霞;旅游合同違約精神損害賠償制度研究[D];鄭州大學(xué);2009年

10 侯琳琳;支農(nóng)信貸合同違約及其預(yù)防對(duì)策探討[D];暨南大學(xué);2013年

，

本文編號(hào)：1965955