發(fā)布時間：2018-06-24 02:34

  本文選題：合同無效 + 社會公共利益�。� 參考：《山東大學》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：對無效合同的確認是合同法理論和司法實踐中的核心問題和棘手難題。關于合同無效,《合同法》第52條規(guī)定了五種情形。其中,第4項"損害社會公共利益而無效",在理論上缺乏研究探討,在司法適用中較難實際操作。縱觀我國民事實體法,找不到對"社會公共利益"概念的明確界定,也不能明晰其認定標準以及與國家利益、集體利益、社會利益、公共利益等常見概念的關系。要理解和把握《合同法》52條第4項的適用,筆者首先嘗試厘清和界定"社會公共利益"。進而,通過閱讀大量案例,結合其他國家的類型化做法,對各種影響合同效力的社會公共利益進行歸納、總結,并盡可能地將其類型化。由此,既能對民商事活動提供指引,提高民商事行為效率,又能為司法機關的審判活動統(tǒng)一裁判標準,維護司法權威。除引言和結語外,全文正文共分為四章。第一章從社會公共利益的基礎理論入手,厘清了作為本文基礎概念的社會公共利益是什么,有何特征,并回顧了民法立法史上有關社會公共利益的表述。接著,參考國內(nèi)外關于利益的學說,對社會公共利益與國家、集體、個人利益等常見概念進行辨析。第二章介紹了社會公共利益類型化的方法。類型化方法是國外立法中較為常見的一種實證與判例研究方法。在社會公共利益與合同效力問題上,類型化是要將社會公共利益蘊含的法治精神與社會生活的實際需求聯(lián)系起來,使法官的價值判斷能符合客觀價值與法治精神。第三章是論文的核心部分,也是創(chuàng)新之處。筆者對收集到的合同無效案件運用統(tǒng)計學的初級方法進行分析,探究法官在司法實踐中是如何以違反社會公共利益認定合同無效的,認定的思路和依據(jù)是否合理,存在哪些問題。第四章筆者通過對案件的深入理解,將案件合同背后所涉的社會公共利益分為三大類并分別選取案例加以闡述。借鑒學者們的類型化觀點,嘗試梳理損害社會公共利益無效的合同類型化體系。并在該體系的基礎上,對司法實踐中適用損害社會公共利益認定合同效力的制度提出完善思路。
[Abstract]:The confirmation of invalid contract is the core problem and difficult problem in the theory of contract law and judicial practice. With regard to the invalidity of a contract, Article 52 of the contract Law provides for five situations. The fourth item, "damage to social and public interests but invalid", is lack of research and discussion in theory, so it is difficult to operate in practice in judicial application. Looking at the civil substantive law of our country, we can not find a clear definition of the concept of "social public interest", nor can we clearly define the standard of its determination and the relationship between it and the common concepts such as national interest, collective interest, social interest, public interest and so on. In order to understand and grasp the application of item 4 of Article 52 of contract Law, the author first tries to clarify and define "social public interest". Then, through reading a large number of cases, combining with the typology practices of other countries, the author sums up and summarizes various kinds of social and public interests that affect the effectiveness of contracts, and classifies them as far as possible. Thus, it can not only provide guidance to civil and commercial activities, improve the efficiency of civil and commercial conduct, but also unify the adjudication standards of judicial organs and maintain judicial authority. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, the text is divided into four chapters. The first chapter starts with the basic theory of the social public interest, clarifies what the social public interest is as the basic concept of this article, and reviews the expression of the social public interest in the history of civil law legislation. Then, referring to the theory of interest at home and abroad, the common concepts of social public interest and national, collective and individual interests are analyzed. The second chapter introduces the classification method of social public interest. Typology is a common empirical and case study method in foreign legislation. On the issue of social public interest and contract effectiveness, typology is to link the spirit of the rule of law contained in social public interest with the actual needs of social life, so that the judge's value judgment can conform to the objective value and the spirit of ruling by law. The third chapter is the core part of the paper, but also the innovation. The author analyzes the collected cases of contract invalidation by using the primary method of statistics, and explores how the judge in judicial practice finds the contract invalid in violation of the social and public interests, and whether the thinking and basis of the determination are reasonable. What are the problems? In the fourth chapter, the author divides the social and public interest involved in the case contract into three categories through the deep understanding of the case. This paper tries to sort out the contract type system which impairs the social public interest by referring to the scholars' stereotyped views. On the basis of the system, the author puts forward some ideas on how to apply the system that damages the validity of the social public interest in the judicial practice.
【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】：D923.6

【相似文獻】

相關期刊論文 前2條

1 ;關于農(nóng)村經(jīng)濟合同情況調(diào)查[J];法學雜志;1985年03期

2 寧紅麗;;論合同類型的認定[J];法商研究;2011年06期

相關重要報紙文章 前5條

1 白月娥;公私合作合同類型有哪些[N];中國財經(jīng)報;2014年

2 許高峰;工程合同類型[N];國際商報;2001年

3 張海敏;無名合同類型劃分的標準[N];法制日報;2005年

4 本報記者 楊文;購買公共服務“嘗鮮”亦要防腐[N];山西日報;2014年

5 吳霞　孫威;鐵嶺“守重”企業(yè)樂見雙贏[N];中國工商報;2011年

相關碩士學位論文 前4條

1 吳丹;損害社會公共利益無效的合同類型化梳理[D];山東大學;2017年

2 羅迷;工資議價、員工努力和公司利潤[D];新疆財經(jīng)大學;2013年

3 陳永旭;有名合同類型化研究[D];西南政法大學;2006年

4 羅琴;市場環(huán)境下售電公司購售電策略研究[D];上海交通大學;2014年

，

本文編號：2059598