【摘要】：遺產(chǎn)歸扣制度的雛形出現(xiàn)在古巴比倫時(shí)期,在古羅馬時(shí)期得到發(fā)展并沿用至今。本文是對(duì)我國(guó)是否適合構(gòu)建歸扣制度研究和討論,在研究的基礎(chǔ)上提出了構(gòu)建我國(guó)歸扣制度的立法建議。我國(guó)《繼承法》中只規(guī)定了同一繼承順序人繼承份額一般應(yīng)當(dāng)均等以及特殊情況下遺產(chǎn)分配不均等的情況。但是這一規(guī)定在實(shí)質(zhì)上也不能去解決繼承人之間的公平問題。本著對(duì)公平原則的追求,提出通過構(gòu)建歸扣制度來彌補(bǔ)《繼承法》的缺陷。雖然有些學(xué)者認(rèn)為歸扣制度會(huì)和意思自治、所有權(quán)等問題產(chǎn)生沖突因此對(duì)構(gòu)建該制度持反對(duì)意見,但是根據(jù)對(duì)歸扣制度適用前提和內(nèi)容的詳細(xì)的規(guī)范,這些沖突是可以解決的。另外我國(guó)民間存在類似歸扣制度的遺產(chǎn)分配習(xí)慣,并且現(xiàn)在經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展飛速,人們生活水平日益提高,私人財(cái)產(chǎn)急劇增加,現(xiàn)在已經(jīng)具備了構(gòu)建歸扣制度的基礎(chǔ)。為了解決共同繼承人之間的公平、維護(hù)家庭和諧和社會(huì)穩(wěn)定的秩序,設(shè)置遺產(chǎn)歸扣制度還是很必要的。本文從對(duì)遺產(chǎn)歸扣制度全面的分析,來論述構(gòu)建歸扣制度在我國(guó)現(xiàn)行法律的可行性和必要性,以及對(duì)適合我國(guó)的歸扣制度藍(lán)圖的構(gòu)想。本文第一部分介紹歸扣制度的歷史發(fā)源以及發(fā)展的狀況。將歸扣制度與我國(guó)特留份制度進(jìn)行了分析比較,論證了兩種制度之間并不存在矛盾,我國(guó)繼承法應(yīng)當(dāng)既建立歸扣制度也需要保留特留份制度。第二部分分析我國(guó)現(xiàn)行繼承法中歸扣制度缺失的原因。闡述了學(xué)界反對(duì)歸扣制度的理由。第三部介紹了德國(guó)、法國(guó)、意大利和美國(guó)關(guān)于歸扣制度立法的成熟經(jīng)驗(yàn)。通過比較分析從中發(fā)現(xiàn)對(duì)我國(guó)構(gòu)建歸扣制度的重要啟示。第四部分結(jié)合中國(guó)的遺產(chǎn)分配習(xí)慣從法理角度論證了在我國(guó)構(gòu)建遺產(chǎn)歸扣制度的可行性。最后一部分是對(duì)構(gòu)建遺產(chǎn)歸扣制度的立法設(shè)想,從遺產(chǎn)歸扣制度適用的前提條件、內(nèi)容、歸扣方式等方面提出了自己的立法建議。
[Abstract]:The embryonic form of the system of inheritance buckling appeared in ancient Babylonian period, developed in ancient Roman period and is still in use today. Based on the research and discussion on whether it is appropriate to construct the system of return deduction in China, this paper puts forward some legislative suggestions on how to construct the system of return deduction in our country. The inheritance Law of our country only stipulates that the inheritance share of the same succession order should be equal in general and that the distribution of inheritance is not equal under special circumstances. But this provision does not, in essence, resolve the issue of equity between heirs. In line with the pursuit of the principle of fairness, this paper puts forward that the defect of inheritance Law should be made up by constructing the system of deduction. Although some scholars think that the system of imputation will conflict with autonomy of will and ownership and so on, they are opposed to the construction of the system, but according to the detailed norms of the premise and content of the system, these conflicts can be solved. In addition, there are similar inheritance distribution habits in our country, and now the economy is developing rapidly, people's living standard is improving day by day, and private property is increasing rapidly. Now we have the foundation to construct the system. In order to solve the equity between co-heirs and maintain the order of family harmony and social stability, it is necessary to set up the system of inheritance deduction. This paper discusses the feasibility and necessity of constructing the system of return deduction in our country from the comprehensive analysis of the system of return and deduction of heritage, as well as the conception of the blueprint of the system of return for deduction which is suitable for our country. The first part of this paper introduces the historical origin and development of the system. This paper analyzes and compares the system of return withholding and the system of special retention in our country, and proves that there is no contradiction between the two systems, and that the inheritance law of our country should establish both the system of return and the system of special retention. The second part analyzes the reasons for the deficiency of the return system in the current inheritance law of our country. This paper expounds the reasons of academic circles' opposition to the system of deduction. The third part introduces the mature experiences of Germany, France, Italy and the United States on the legislation of deduction system. Through the comparative analysis, we find the important enlightenment to the establishment of the return system in our country. The fourth part demonstrates the feasibility of constructing the system of heritage deduction in our country from the angle of legal theory combined with China's heritage distribution habits. In the last part, the author puts forward his own legislative suggestions on the construction of the system of heritage deduction, including the precondition, content and method of the application of the system.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：河北大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D923.5

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 李德勇;;繼承人如何支取被繼承人的存款[J];農(nóng)家科技;2006年08期

2 榮成;;繼承人有清償被繼承人電費(fèi)義務(wù)嗎?[J];農(nóng)電管理;2006年10期

3 李景林 ,熊裕武;試論被繼承人債務(wù)的清償[J];南昌大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(人文社會(huì)科學(xué)版);1986年01期

4 李玉珍;;繼承人以外對(duì)被繼承人扶養(yǎng)較多的人辦理取得遺產(chǎn)公證的問題[J];法學(xué)雜志;1992年04期

5 ;繼承人應(yīng)否承擔(dān)被繼承人生前的個(gè)人債務(wù)[J];黨員之友;1998年03期

6 榮成;對(duì)一起清償被繼承人電費(fèi)債務(wù)糾紛案的評(píng)析[J];農(nóng)村電工;2005年02期

7 劉淑珍;被繼承人個(gè)人的財(cái)產(chǎn)才能繼承[J];人民司法;1985年04期

8 楊震;;關(guān)于限制被繼承人生前贈(zèng)與行為問題的探討[J];法學(xué)研究;1988年05期

9 ;法定繼承人可以撤銷被繼承人的贈(zèng)與嗎?[J];山西老年;2012年01期

10 ;如何認(rèn)定繼承人虐待被繼承人情節(jié)是否嚴(yán)重[J];伴侶(A版);2002年08期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前3條

1 倪曉晶;;淺析遺產(chǎn)債權(quán)清償責(zé)任若干問題[A];當(dāng)代法學(xué)論壇（2008年第4輯）[C];2008年

2 蔣超;倪s，

本文編號(hào)：2253488