重大誤解民事行為研究
發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-12-13 01:48
【摘要】：重大誤解制度是以民法的意思自治原則、誠(chéng)實(shí)信用原則為基礎(chǔ)而設(shè)立。它在平衡意思自治、保護(hù)信賴?yán)�、維護(hù)交易安全等多方面都發(fā)揮著重大的作用。當(dāng)事人在合同的履行過(guò)程中時(shí)常發(fā)現(xiàn)自己的意思與表示不一致,所以以重大誤解為由而申請(qǐng)變更和撤銷已成立合同的案件數(shù)量近年來(lái)也一直持續(xù)不斷。我國(guó)關(guān)于重大誤解制度的立法存在定義不明、構(gòu)成要件過(guò)于簡(jiǎn)單、相似法律制度易混淆等問(wèn)題,難以在司法實(shí)踐中對(duì)重大誤解案件進(jìn)行有效、明確地判斷,造成了判案標(biāo)準(zhǔn)不一、裁判結(jié)果迥異的局面。另外,學(xué)界對(duì)于重大誤解的概念以及內(nèi)涵,認(rèn)定及救濟(jì)的各方面都有一定程度的爭(zhēng)議�；谝陨犀F(xiàn)狀,對(duì)我國(guó)重大誤解民事行為的研究具有理論和實(shí)踐的雙重意義。本文主要采用案例分析法、比較研究法、利益衡量法等方法對(duì)文章進(jìn)行論述。最終想要達(dá)到的目的就是發(fā)現(xiàn)重大誤解制度在司法實(shí)踐中所遇到的問(wèn)題,通過(guò)綜合學(xué)習(xí)和研究獲得相應(yīng)的解決途徑�？偟膩�(lái)說(shuō),存在的問(wèn)題主要包括以下幾個(gè)方面:1.重大誤解的概念表述與其內(nèi)涵不統(tǒng)一;2.重大誤解民事行為的類型太籠統(tǒng)、不夠明確;3.重大誤解民事行為的認(rèn)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)模糊,司法實(shí)踐中難以統(tǒng)一意見;4.對(duì)重大誤解民事行為的救濟(jì)途徑規(guī)定得過(guò)于簡(jiǎn)略。論文就是在這些問(wèn)題的基礎(chǔ)上來(lái)進(jìn)行分析和比較的。首先,第一部分結(jié)合一些學(xué)者的觀點(diǎn)和現(xiàn)行立法的具體規(guī)定,對(duì)我國(guó)重大誤解的概念、類型進(jìn)行一個(gè)全面的分析。通過(guò)這一部分的論述能夠?qū)ξ覈?guó)的重大誤解制度有一個(gè)較為廣泛地、基礎(chǔ)地了解。第二部分是重大誤解的認(rèn)定。這一部分也是在實(shí)踐中得以最直接體現(xiàn)的部分。在這一部分中,主要通過(guò)法律解釋的方法對(duì)我國(guó)現(xiàn)行法關(guān)于重大誤解民事行為構(gòu)成要件的規(guī)定進(jìn)行分析,同時(shí)通過(guò)司法判例來(lái)體現(xiàn)出其缺陷、不足和可修正性。在前一部分的基礎(chǔ)上,第三部分對(duì)重大誤解民事行為的救濟(jì)進(jìn)行全面、深入的分析。主要希望能夠?qū)ΜF(xiàn)行法進(jìn)行全面的解釋,并結(jié)合司法判例,將其優(yōu)點(diǎn)和不足都清晰地體現(xiàn)出來(lái)。第四部分通過(guò)比較研究的方法對(duì)德國(guó)法上的錯(cuò)誤制度進(jìn)行學(xué)習(xí)和研究,再將其與我國(guó)的重大誤解制度進(jìn)行比較。之所以選擇德國(guó)法進(jìn)行比較,是因?yàn)槠鋵?duì)我國(guó)立法有著深刻的影響且相關(guān)規(guī)定也較為成熟。通過(guò)比較,能夠?qū)⑽覈?guó)現(xiàn)行立法的不足之處更加形象地表述出來(lái)。最后一部分就是在前面幾部分的基礎(chǔ)上,指出我國(guó)關(guān)于重大誤解民事行為的立法所存在的缺陷和不足,司法實(shí)踐中所存在的問(wèn)題,以及今后的立法應(yīng)該如何應(yīng)對(duì)實(shí)踐、如何回應(yīng)社會(huì)的真實(shí)需要。
[Abstract]:The major misunderstanding system is based on the principle of autonomy of will and the principle of good faith in civil law. It plays an important role in balancing will autonomy, protecting trust interests and maintaining transaction security. During the performance of the contract, the parties often find that their intention is inconsistent with the expression, so the number of cases that apply for the modification and revocation of the established contract on the basis of major misunderstanding has been continuous in recent years. There are some problems in the legislation of the major misunderstanding system in our country, such as the definition is not clear, the constitution is too simple, the similar legal system is easy to be confused and so on, so it is difficult to judge the major misunderstanding cases effectively and clearly in the judicial practice. This has resulted in a situation in which the standard of adjudication is different and the result of the judgment is quite different. In addition, there is a certain degree of controversy about the concept and connotation of the major misunderstanding, the determination and relief of all aspects. Based on the above situation, it has both theoretical and practical significance for the study of major misunderstandings of civil acts in China. This article mainly uses the case analysis method, the comparative research method, the benefit measure method and so on method carries on the discussion to the article. The ultimate aim is to find out the problems encountered in the judicial practice of the major misunderstanding system and to obtain the corresponding solutions through comprehensive study and research. In general, the existing problems mainly include the following aspects: 1. The concept of major misunderstanding is not consistent with its connotation; 2. The types of major misunderstandings of civil acts are too general and not clear enough; 3. The identification standard of the major misunderstanding civil act is vague, it is difficult to unify the opinion in the judicial practice; 4. The remedies for major misunderstandings of civil acts are too simplistic. The paper is based on these problems to analyze and compare. First of all, the first part makes a comprehensive analysis of the concept and types of major misunderstandings in our country, combining the viewpoints of some scholars and the specific provisions of current legislation. Through the discussion of this part, we can have a broad and basic understanding of the major misunderstanding system in our country. The second part is the identification of major misunderstanding. This part is also the most direct embodiment in practice. In this part, mainly through the method of legal interpretation of the current law of our country on major misunderstandings of civil acts constitute elements of the analysis of the provisions, at the same time through judicial jurisprudence to reflect its defects, deficiencies and correctability. On the basis of the former part, the third part makes a comprehensive and in-depth analysis on the relief of the major misunderstandings of civil acts. It is hoped that the present law can be comprehensively interpreted and its advantages and disadvantages are clearly reflected in the judicial precedents. The fourth part studies and studies the wrong system in German law through the method of comparative study, and then compares it with the major misunderstanding system of our country. The reason why the German law is compared is that it has a profound influence on the legislation of our country and the relevant provisions are more mature. Through comparison, we can more vividly express the shortcomings of our current legislation. In the last part, on the basis of the previous parts, the author points out the defects and shortcomings of the legislation on the major misunderstandings of civil acts, the problems existing in the judicial practice, and how the future legislation should deal with the practice. How to respond to the real needs of society.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：D923
本文編號(hào)：2375650
[Abstract]:The major misunderstanding system is based on the principle of autonomy of will and the principle of good faith in civil law. It plays an important role in balancing will autonomy, protecting trust interests and maintaining transaction security. During the performance of the contract, the parties often find that their intention is inconsistent with the expression, so the number of cases that apply for the modification and revocation of the established contract on the basis of major misunderstanding has been continuous in recent years. There are some problems in the legislation of the major misunderstanding system in our country, such as the definition is not clear, the constitution is too simple, the similar legal system is easy to be confused and so on, so it is difficult to judge the major misunderstanding cases effectively and clearly in the judicial practice. This has resulted in a situation in which the standard of adjudication is different and the result of the judgment is quite different. In addition, there is a certain degree of controversy about the concept and connotation of the major misunderstanding, the determination and relief of all aspects. Based on the above situation, it has both theoretical and practical significance for the study of major misunderstandings of civil acts in China. This article mainly uses the case analysis method, the comparative research method, the benefit measure method and so on method carries on the discussion to the article. The ultimate aim is to find out the problems encountered in the judicial practice of the major misunderstanding system and to obtain the corresponding solutions through comprehensive study and research. In general, the existing problems mainly include the following aspects: 1. The concept of major misunderstanding is not consistent with its connotation; 2. The types of major misunderstandings of civil acts are too general and not clear enough; 3. The identification standard of the major misunderstanding civil act is vague, it is difficult to unify the opinion in the judicial practice; 4. The remedies for major misunderstandings of civil acts are too simplistic. The paper is based on these problems to analyze and compare. First of all, the first part makes a comprehensive analysis of the concept and types of major misunderstandings in our country, combining the viewpoints of some scholars and the specific provisions of current legislation. Through the discussion of this part, we can have a broad and basic understanding of the major misunderstanding system in our country. The second part is the identification of major misunderstanding. This part is also the most direct embodiment in practice. In this part, mainly through the method of legal interpretation of the current law of our country on major misunderstandings of civil acts constitute elements of the analysis of the provisions, at the same time through judicial jurisprudence to reflect its defects, deficiencies and correctability. On the basis of the former part, the third part makes a comprehensive and in-depth analysis on the relief of the major misunderstandings of civil acts. It is hoped that the present law can be comprehensively interpreted and its advantages and disadvantages are clearly reflected in the judicial precedents. The fourth part studies and studies the wrong system in German law through the method of comparative study, and then compares it with the major misunderstanding system of our country. The reason why the German law is compared is that it has a profound influence on the legislation of our country and the relevant provisions are more mature. Through comparison, we can more vividly express the shortcomings of our current legislation. In the last part, on the basis of the previous parts, the author points out the defects and shortcomings of the legislation on the major misunderstandings of civil acts, the problems existing in the judicial practice, and how the future legislation should deal with the practice. How to respond to the real needs of society.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：D923
【共引文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前3條
1 王朦;;完全民事行為能力推定的法律問(wèn)題探析[J];北方經(jīng)貿(mào);2014年05期
2 張亮;;設(shè)立海事賠償責(zé)任限制基金形式審查的反思[J];法律適用;2015年03期
3 任憑;;公序良俗原則在我國(guó)民事審判中的適用規(guī)則初探[J];法制博覽;2015年25期
相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前2條
1 楊德群;公序良俗原則比較研究[D];湖南師范大學(xué);2014年
2 陳燁;刑法的特殊財(cái)產(chǎn)類型研究[D];武漢大學(xué);2014年
相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前4條
1 湯麗;非基于法律行為的不動(dòng)產(chǎn)物權(quán)變動(dòng)[D];大連海事大學(xué);2014年
2 苗雨;論版權(quán)默示許可[D];西南政法大學(xué);2013年
3 柯光艷;程序視角下的法人[D];浙江師范大學(xué);2014年
4 徐潔;論保險(xiǎn)合同告知義務(wù)制度[D];復(fù)旦大學(xué);2012年
，本文編號(hào)：2375650
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/minfalunwen/2375650.html
最近更新
教材專著
