本文選題：無效法律行為 + 無效法律行為轉(zhuǎn)換��； 參考：《西北師范大學(xué)》2016年碩士論文

【摘要】：法律行為制度(1)相對于成文法系國家而言,其重要性怎么強(qiáng)調(diào)都不為過,其是在對民法分則的相關(guān)制度進(jìn)行歸納總結(jié),并通過“提取公因式”的方式產(chǎn)生的。法律行為制度在現(xiàn)代民法中居于核心地位,它把民法的各個(gè)部分串聯(lián)在一起,使其成為有機(jī)整體,可謂是民法的“一根紅線”,是民法的“精髓”。法律行為制度以意思表示為核心,其在現(xiàn)實(shí)生活中起著兩方面重要作用,第一是充分保障私法自治原則,即保障當(dāng)事人的意思自治,使其意思表示充分發(fā)揮;第二是限制意思自治,即從社會公平正義的角度考慮,把當(dāng)事人的民事活動納入法律規(guī)定的框架中,使其符合社會的公平正義。從哲學(xué)的角度來講,兩個(gè)作用是既對立又統(tǒng)一的關(guān)系,對立中包含統(tǒng)一,統(tǒng)一中包含對立,即在保障中進(jìn)行限制,在限制中進(jìn)行保障。兩個(gè)作用共同構(gòu)成該制度的內(nèi)在協(xié)調(diào)性,防止“過猶不及”。限制意思自治,主要是通過無效、效力待定和可撤銷等初始效力體現(xiàn)出來的,其中以無效效力最為嚴(yán)厲,對當(dāng)事人也最為不利。無效法律行為體現(xiàn)了國家干預(yù)性和國家限制性。當(dāng)然,限制是有必要的,但限制也不能絕對擴(kuò)大化,進(jìn)而干涉意思自治甚至主導(dǎo)意思自治。對此,臺灣政治大學(xué)曾世雄教授認(rèn)為:“民法針對“無效之法律行為”,有兩種基本上相互抵觸之設(shè)計(jì)”。(2)無效法律行為制度是本文的基礎(chǔ)和前提,該制度的固有弊端也是本文論述的邏輯起點(diǎn)。為了克服該制度的固有弊端以及對該制度的僵硬性進(jìn)行軟化處理,于是,無效法律行為轉(zhuǎn)換制度橫空出世。無效法律行為轉(zhuǎn)換制度的功能和作用在于對無效法律行為制度進(jìn)行軟化處理,如此有利于保障意思自治、鼓勵(lì)交易、維護(hù)社會公共利益、保障社會的公平正義。故無效法律行為轉(zhuǎn)換制度是符合社會現(xiàn)實(shí)需要的。所以,有必要對無效法律行為轉(zhuǎn)換的理論基礎(chǔ)、方式、要件(重點(diǎn)是轉(zhuǎn)換的途徑要件)進(jìn)行分析解讀,使其規(guī)范化。本文采取了文獻(xiàn)分析法、歷史研究法、實(shí)證比較分析法以及邏輯分析和演繹等方法來對無效法律行為轉(zhuǎn)換制度進(jìn)行深刻闡述,并從法學(xué)理論和實(shí)證法相結(jié)合的角度,對我國關(guān)于該制度的理論學(xué)說和單行法律、法規(guī)和司法解釋的規(guī)定進(jìn)行歸納總結(jié),并指出我國有必要對其進(jìn)行立法上的規(guī)定。本文正文由四部分構(gòu)成:第一部分,無效法律行為轉(zhuǎn)換制度概述。首先,對無效法律行為概念和意義進(jìn)行分析,并指出該制度設(shè)計(jì)的固有弊端所在,從而引出下文;其次,論述無效法律行為的轉(zhuǎn)換及其意義所在。通過文獻(xiàn)比較分析法,對多位學(xué)者對此制度的定義進(jìn)行比較分析,得出自己對該制度的定義,并對該制度的意義、價(jià)值及其合理性進(jìn)行簡單闡述;再次,闡述無效法律行為轉(zhuǎn)換制度的發(fā)端及其歷史沿革。通過歷史研究法,對古羅馬法上的“無效民事行為復(fù)活”制度進(jìn)行深度解剖,從羅馬早期的注重交易形式到羅馬后期的注重意思表示,“無效民事行為復(fù)活”制度運(yùn)用而生。該制度產(chǎn)生后,對大陸法系各國產(chǎn)生深刻的影響,各國分別立法效仿,對該制度予以繼承和移植。不僅如此,該制度也對英美法系國家產(chǎn)生影響。第二部分,無效法律行為轉(zhuǎn)換制度域外立法啟示。對兩大法系的無效法律行為轉(zhuǎn)換制度進(jìn)行比較法上的研究,并從實(shí)證法角度,對兩大法系各個(gè)國家的法律規(guī)定進(jìn)行梳理,歸納和總結(jié)其相同點(diǎn)和不同點(diǎn),并指出各自的優(yōu)點(diǎn)和缺點(diǎn),從而得出比較法上的啟示。主要的啟示有:該制度在各國的立法模式、轉(zhuǎn)換的構(gòu)成要件和適用范圍大致相同。而共同的缺點(diǎn)是都沒有對無效法律行為轉(zhuǎn)換制度的背后理論進(jìn)行探究,使該制度缺少本源的支撐。第三部分,無效法律行為轉(zhuǎn)換制度的理論基礎(chǔ)梳理。通過邏輯分析和演繹方法,對無效法律行為轉(zhuǎn)換制度的理論基礎(chǔ)進(jìn)行梳理。俗話講:“求木之長者,必固其根本”,任何具體的制度都是建立在一定的基礎(chǔ)理論之上的,理論基礎(chǔ)之于具體制度,好比地基之于大廈,離開了基礎(chǔ)理論的支撐,具體制度就會成為“無地基之大廈”,整個(gè)制度都無法構(gòu)建。無效法律行為轉(zhuǎn)換制度同樣需要相關(guān)理論基礎(chǔ)的支撐,本文認(rèn)為,無效法律行為轉(zhuǎn)換制度以意思自治原則、鼓勵(lì)交易原則、法律行為初始效力狀態(tài)理論和無效法律行為撤銷理論等四個(gè)原則或理論為理論基礎(chǔ),其中意思自治原則是從當(dāng)事人的意思自治與國家實(shí)施干預(yù)相博弈角度進(jìn)行論述;鼓勵(lì)交易原則則是從社會效率角度進(jìn)行論述的;法律行為初始效力狀態(tài)理論則是從轉(zhuǎn)換時(shí)間的角度來論述的;無效法律行為撤銷理論則是從公平正義的角度出發(fā),著重從保護(hù)弱勢群體方面進(jìn)行論述的。后續(xù)的轉(zhuǎn)換方式和轉(zhuǎn)換要件的論述均是建立在此基礎(chǔ)之上的。第四部分,無效法律行為新型轉(zhuǎn)換方式及構(gòu)成要件的重新構(gòu)建。首先,對無效法律行為的傳統(tǒng)轉(zhuǎn)換方式進(jìn)行了批判,主張傳統(tǒng)上的法律轉(zhuǎn)換和解釋轉(zhuǎn)換存在不合理性,在進(jìn)行適用時(shí)會產(chǎn)生概念混淆,甚至矛盾,并對“約定轉(zhuǎn)換”形式予以拋棄,進(jìn)而提出新的轉(zhuǎn)換方式,即行為轉(zhuǎn)換和效力轉(zhuǎn)換;其次,在深入的分析原有構(gòu)成要件理論和學(xué)說的基礎(chǔ)之上,對無效法律行為轉(zhuǎn)換的構(gòu)成要件進(jìn)行了重新構(gòu)建,并提出“新三要件說”,即積極要件、消極要件和途徑要件(1);再次,對“新三要件說”中途徑要件進(jìn)行類型化。通過對我國及各國實(shí)證法規(guī)定進(jìn)行研究,利用“提起公因式”的方法進(jìn)行歸納、總結(jié),將轉(zhuǎn)換途徑進(jìn)行類型化,以便實(shí)務(wù)操作。
[Abstract]:The legal act system (1) is not too important to emphasize the importance of the legal system, which is summed up in the relevant system of the civil law and by the way of "extracting the public factor". The legal act system is in the nuclear status in the modern civil law, which connects the various parts of the civil law. To make it an organic whole is a "red line" of civil law. It is the essence of civil law. The legal act system takes the meaning as the core. It plays two important roles in the real life. The first is to fully guarantee the principle of autonomy of private law, that is to guarantee the autonomy of the parties and make its meaning full play; and second is the limitation. Autonomy, which is considered from the angle of social justice and justice, integrates the civil activities of the parties into the framework of the legal provisions and makes it conform to the fair and justice of the society. From the philosophical point of view, the two functions are the opposite and unified relations, the unity is contained in the opposition, and the unity contains the opposites, that is, the limitation in the guarantee and the restriction. The two functions constitute the internal coordination of the system to prevent "overuse". To restrict the autonomy, it is mainly embodied in the initial effect, such as invalid, undetermined and revocable effect, which is the most severe and the worst for the parties. The invalid legal act embodies the state intervention and the state. Restrictive. Of course, restrictions are necessary, but the restrictions can not be absolutely expanded, and then interfering with the autonomy of the meaning and even the autonomy of the meaning. In this case, Professor Ceng Shixiong of the Political University of Taiwan believes that "civil law has two basically conflicting designs against" the legal act of "invalid". (2) the system of invalid legal behavior is the basis of this article. The inherent malpractice of the system is also the logical starting point of this article. In order to overcome the inherent malpractice of the system and soften the stiffness of the system, the system of invalid legal behavior conversion is passed out. The function and function of the invalid legal act conversion system is to soften the invalid legal behavior system. Handling, so as to guarantee the autonomy of the meaning, encourage the transaction, safeguard the social and public interests, and guarantee the fair and justice of the society. Therefore, the system of invalid legal act conversion is in conformity with the social reality. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze and interpret the theoretical basis, the way and the important part of the transformation of the invalid legal behavior. It has adopted the methods of literature analysis, historical research, empirical comparative analysis and logic analysis and deduction to elaborate the invalid legal behavior transformation system, and from the angle of combining the legal theory and the empirical method, the theory and the single law, law, and judicial interpretation of the system in our country. In this paper, the text is made up of four parts. The text of this article is composed of four parts: the first part, an overview of the system of invalid legal behavior conversion. First, the concept and significance of the invalid legal behavior are analyzed, and the inherent drawbacks of the system design are pointed out, and then the following are elicited. Secondly, the discussion is made. The transformation of the invalid legal act and its significance. Through the comparative analysis of literature, the definition of the system is compared and analyzed, the definition of the system is drawn, and the significance, value and rationality of the system are briefly expounded. Again, the origin and historical evolution of the system of invalid legal action conversion is expounded. Through the historical study, the system of "resurrection of invalid civil behavior" in ancient Rome law was deeply dissected. From the early period of Rome to the attention of trading form to the attention of the late Rome, the system of "resurrection of invalid civil behavior" was born. After the system was produced, it has a profound influence on the countries of the grand land law system and the countries have established each other. The system will inherit and transplant the system. Not only that, the system also has an impact on the Anglo American legal system. The second part, the Enlightenment from the extraterritorial legislation of the ineffective legal act conversion system, the comparative legal study of the conversion system of the invalid legal behavior in the two legal systems, and the law of the two legal systems from the perspective of the empirical law. To sort out, sum up and sum up their similarities and differences, and to point out their respective advantages and shortcomings, and to draw a comparative legal inspiration. The main inspiration is that the system is roughly the same in the legislative mode of the country, the constituent elements of the conversion and the scope of application. In the third part, the theoretical basis of the system of invalid legal behavior conversion is combed. The theoretical basis of the system of invalid legal behavior conversion is combed through logical analysis and deduction. The saying goes: "the long of the wood seeking is fundamental", and any specific system is established. On the basis of a certain basic theory, the basis of the theory is like the concrete system, which is like the foundation of the building, leaving the support of the basic theory, the concrete system will become the "building without foundation", the whole system can not be constructed. The system of invalid legal behavior conversion also needs the support of the theoretical basis. This article believes that the invalid legal behavior is not valid. The system is based on four principles or theories, such as the principle of autonomy of the meaning, the principle of encouraging the transaction, the theory of the initial state of legal action and the theory of revocation of invalid legal behavior. The principle of autonomy is to discuss the angle of game between the autonomy of the parties and the intervention of the state, and the principle of encouraging the transaction is from the society. The theory of the initial effect of legal action is discussed from the angle of transition time; the theory of revocation of invalid legal behavior is from the angle of fairness and justice, focusing on the protection of the disadvantaged groups. The follow-up mode of conversion and the discussion of the conversion requirements are based on this basis. The fourth part, the new transformation method of invalid legal act and the re construction of the constitutive requirements. First, the traditional transformation of the invalid legal behavior is criticized, and the traditional legal conversion and interpretation conversion are unreasonable. In the case of application, there will be conceptual confusion, even contradictions, and the form of "agreement conversion" is given. In order to abandon, then put forward a new mode of conversion, namely, behavior conversion and effect conversion; secondly, on the basis of in-depth analysis of the original constitutive elements theory and theory, the constitutive requirements of the conversion of invalid legal behavior are rebuilt, and the "new three elements", that is, positive elements, negative elements and path elements (1); again, "The new three elements" is typed in the middle path. Through the study of the provisions of the empirical law of China and other countries, the method of "raising the public factor" is summarized and summed up, and the transformation approaches are typed in order to operate.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西北師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2016
【分類號】：D923

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 張川華;無效法律行為轉(zhuǎn)換探析——兼評《中華人民共和國民法(草案)》第67條[J];河北法學(xué);2004年08期

2 陳歷幸;;論無效法律行為的補(bǔ)正和轉(zhuǎn)換[J];政治與法律;2006年06期

3 胡金輝;;無效法律行為及其救濟(jì)[J];法制與社會;2006年20期

4 劉明全;周煜;;無效法律行為的撤銷問題研究[J];法制與經(jīng)濟(jì)(上半月);2007年06期

5 宋炳庸;試論無效法律行為用語的科學(xué)性[J];延邊大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);1994年01期

6 董迎雪;;無效法律行為效力轉(zhuǎn)換制度研究及借鑒[J];法學(xué)雜志;2014年02期

7 吳光明;;無效法律行為之探討——海峽兩岸相關(guān)概念之比較[J];河南財(cái)經(jīng)政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2013年06期

8 宋炳庸;無效法律行為用語不可屏棄[J];法學(xué)研究;1994年03期

9 魯春雅;;論法律行為補(bǔ)正制度的建構(gòu)[J];清華法學(xué);2011年04期

10 宋炳庸;法律行為辯證規(guī)律試探──對1985年全國民法會議決定的反思[J];延邊大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);1996年01期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前1條

1 李曉燕;撤銷法律行為 還是無效法律行為[N];經(jīng)理日報(bào);2007年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 黃忠;無效法律行為制度研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2009年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 張曉華;無效法律行為轉(zhuǎn)換制度研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2009年

2 李娟;無效法律行為轉(zhuǎn)換制度研究[D];中國政法大學(xué);2010年

3 陳金龍;無效法律行為的轉(zhuǎn)換制度研究[D];煙臺大學(xué);2011年

4 馮凱;無效法律行為轉(zhuǎn)換之探究[D];東北財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué);2016年

5 鄭詩緣;無效法律行為的效力轉(zhuǎn)換制度研究[D];海南大學(xué);2016年

6 馬葦葦;無效法律行為轉(zhuǎn)換制度研究[D];西北師范大學(xué);2016年

7 羅潤;無效法律行為轉(zhuǎn)換制度研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2012年

8 盧雪華;無效法律行為轉(zhuǎn)換之研究[D];華東政法學(xué)院;2005年

9 潘箏;論無效法律行為的轉(zhuǎn)換[D];廈門大學(xué);2006年

10 李逸豪;論不法原因給付的返還規(guī)則[D];西南政法大學(xué);2012年

，

本文編號：1993078