發(fā)布時(shí)間：2019-06-10 01:43

【摘要】：婚姻關(guān)系存續(xù)期間對(duì)夫妻共有財(cái)產(chǎn)的處分,是夫妻關(guān)系的一項(xiàng)重要內(nèi)容。且隨著我國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)社會(huì)的快速發(fā)展,夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)單方處分行為在社會(huì)實(shí)踐生活中發(fā)生的概率尤為頻繁,因此引起的法律糾紛也愈來(lái)愈多。在此類(lèi)案件中,利益受損的夫妻另一方往往因該行為屬于無(wú)權(quán)處分而向人民法院主張行為人因夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)單方處分行為而與第三人訂立的合同無(wú)效,并要求返還共有物。在具體處理這類(lèi)案件過(guò)程中,因該類(lèi)處分行為本身的復(fù)雜多樣性,以及立法思想的變化和對(duì)法律規(guī)定的不同理解,導(dǎo)致理論界與司法實(shí)踐界對(duì)該類(lèi)問(wèn)題的認(rèn)知與實(shí)際處理上均出現(xiàn)不同的分歧與爭(zhēng)議,如法律定性的不準(zhǔn)確,效力認(rèn)定上的不明晰,責(zé)任規(guī)范的不恰當(dāng)以及適用法律上的隨意性與模糊性等,導(dǎo)致實(shí)踐審判過(guò)程中出現(xiàn)同案不同判的情況,嚴(yán)重影響司法的權(quán)威性及統(tǒng)一性。并進(jìn)一步影響市場(chǎng)交易規(guī)則的不穩(wěn)定性,影響社會(huì)市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)秩序的正常運(yùn)轉(zhuǎn)。同時(shí),《最高人民法院關(guān)于審理買(mǎi)賣(mài)合同糾紛案件適用法律問(wèn)題的解釋》第3條之規(guī)定,又與我國(guó)現(xiàn)行法律的規(guī)定存在讓人不解之處,理應(yīng)正視其存在的問(wèn)題并尋求相應(yīng)解決方法。本文運(yùn)用比較分析與實(shí)證分析相結(jié)合的方法,從夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)單方處分行為的案例著手,分析夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)單方處分行為問(wèn)題在國(guó)內(nèi)外、理論界與實(shí)務(wù)界的不同觀點(diǎn)與做法,反思該類(lèi)問(wèn)題對(duì)我國(guó)的借鑒意義。同時(shí)通過(guò)無(wú)權(quán)處分與善意取得、無(wú)權(quán)代理、表見(jiàn)代理、無(wú)因管理、權(quán)利瑕疵擔(dān)保等相關(guān)法律制度之分析、比對(duì),分析得出夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)單方處分行為的法律性質(zhì)為無(wú)權(quán)處分,并推導(dǎo)出因該無(wú)權(quán)處分行為與第三人訂立的合同為效力待定的合同。同時(shí),結(jié)合《最高人民法院關(guān)于審理買(mǎi)賣(mài)合同糾紛案件適用法律問(wèn)題的解釋》第3條之規(guī)定,分析該條規(guī)定對(duì)我國(guó)當(dāng)前處理夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)單方處分行為時(shí)存在的問(wèn)題,通過(guò)規(guī)范該解釋的解釋主體、適用標(biāo)的、適用范圍、規(guī)范意志及與其他相關(guān)法律規(guī)則之間的界限,提出解決此類(lèi)問(wèn)題的意見(jiàn)、建議。
[Abstract]:The disposition of husband and wife's common property during the existence of marital relationship is an important part of marital relationship. With the rapid development of economy and society in our country, the probability of unilateral disposition of husband and wife's common property is particularly frequent in social practice, so there are more and more legal disputes. In such cases, the other party of the husband and wife whose interests are damaged often claims to the people's court that the contract concluded by the perpetrator with the third party because of the unilateral disposition of the joint property of the husband and wife is invalid because the act belongs to the unauthorized disposition, and demands the return of the common property. In the course of dealing specifically with such cases, due to the complex diversity of such disciplinary acts themselves, as well as changes in legislative thinking and different understandings of the provisions of the law, As a result, there are different differences and disputes in the cognition and actual treatment of this kind of problems between the theoretical circle and the judicial practice circles, such as the inaccurate nature of the law and the unclear identification of the effectiveness. The inappropriateness of liability norms and the arbitrariness and fuzziness of applicable law lead to the emergence of different judgments in the course of trial, which seriously affects the authority and unity of judicature. And further affect the instability of market trading rules, affect the normal operation of social market economy order. At the same time, the provisions of Article 3 of the interpretation of the Supreme people's Court on the Application of disputes in Sale and purchase contracts are puzzling with the provisions of the current laws of our country. We should face up to its existing problems and seek corresponding solutions. This paper uses the method of comparative analysis and empirical analysis, starting from the case of unilateral disposition of joint property between husband and wife, analyzes the different viewpoints and practices of unilateral disposition behavior of common property of husband and wife at home and abroad, theoretical circle and practical circles. Reflect on the reference significance of this kind of problem to our country. At the same time, through the analysis and comparison of the relevant legal systems, such as unauthorized disposition and bona fide acquisition, no agency, apparent agency, no cause management, guarantee for defects of rights, and so on, it is concluded that the legal nature of unilateral disposition of joint property of husband and wife is unauthorized. The contract concluded with the third party because of the unauthorized disposition is the contract to be determined. At the same time, combined with the provisions of Article 3 of the interpretation of the Supreme people's Court on the Application of disputes in the contract of Sale and purchase, this article analyzes the problems existing in dealing with the unilateral disposition of the joint property of husband and wife in our country at present. By standardizing the subject of interpretation, the subject matter of application, the scope of application, standardizing the will and the boundaries between the will and other relevant legal rules, this paper puts forward some suggestions and suggestions for solving this kind of problems.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：云南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D923.6

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 何德敏;淺談夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)的使用和管理[J];蕪湖職業(yè)技術(shù)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2000年03期

2 曾昕;這是夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)嗎?[J];學(xué)習(xí)導(dǎo)報(bào);2002年03期

3 袁仕友;夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)應(yīng)如何處置[J];湖南農(nóng)業(yè);2004年04期

4 本刊法律顧問(wèn);;子女受贈(zèng)財(cái)產(chǎn)能否以夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)分割[J];新疆人大;2004年07期

5 ;離婚了夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)怎么分[J];致富之友;2005年07期

6 ;父母房子是夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)嗎?[J];中國(guó)民兵;2005年03期

7 潘家永;;離婚期間繼承的遺產(chǎn)是否屬夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)[J];農(nóng)家科技;2006年03期

8 ;離婚未遂期間繼承的遺產(chǎn)是否屬于夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)[J];新農(nóng)村;2006年01期

9 凌昌;黃國(guó)法;;復(fù)員費(fèi)不全是夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)[J];農(nóng)民科技培訓(xùn);2006年08期

10 馨曦;;車(chē)禍賠償金不屬夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)[J];道路交通管理;2006年08期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前1條

1 鐘鋒;盤(pán)佳;;論離婚知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)分割機(jī)制的構(gòu)建[A];探索社會(huì)主義司法規(guī)律與完善民商事法律制度研究——全國(guó)法院第23屆學(xué)術(shù)討論會(huì)獲獎(jiǎng)?wù)撐募ㄏ拢C];2011年

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前10條

1 肖久明;婚前房產(chǎn)能以夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)分割嗎？[N];甘肅日?qǐng)?bào);2004年

2 建鋒;該房產(chǎn)是夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)嗎[N];江蘇經(jīng)濟(jì)報(bào);2004年

3 陳健;小議“夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)”[N];中國(guó)黃金報(bào);2013年

4 毛國(guó)平;夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)執(zhí)行中的追加[N];江蘇法制報(bào);2013年

5 韓群長(zhǎng) 王書(shū)林;婚前房屋婚后所得租金是否屬于夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)[N];農(nóng)民日?qǐng)?bào);2014年

6 ;辭職補(bǔ)償金是夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)嗎[N];承德日?qǐng)?bào);2005年

7 龔明光 律師;與香港人在內(nèi)地離婚可否分割夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)[N];法治快報(bào);2004年

8 ;離婚時(shí)哪些財(cái)產(chǎn)可以按照夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)分割[N];法制日?qǐng)?bào);2003年

9 ;離婚時(shí)一方隱藏、轉(zhuǎn)移財(cái)產(chǎn)怎么辦？[N];解放日?qǐng)?bào);2003年

10 高棟明;夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)與個(gè)人財(cái)產(chǎn)的區(qū)分[N];江蘇經(jīng)濟(jì)報(bào);2003年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 張麗;我國(guó)夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)范圍研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2009年

2 王媛媛;夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)研究[D];鄭州大學(xué);2010年

3 楊枝堯;婚內(nèi)夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)分割制度研究[D];上海社會(huì)科學(xué)院;2012年

4 周夢(mèng)溪;婚內(nèi)夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)分割法律問(wèn)題研究[D];湘潭大學(xué);2013年

5 律楊;夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)認(rèn)定的若干問(wèn)題研究[D];河北經(jīng)貿(mào)大學(xué);2014年

6 周權(quán);夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)管理制度探討[D];中國(guó)青年政治學(xué)院;2014年

7 郭菲菲;我國(guó)婚內(nèi)夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)分割制度研究[D];山東大學(xué);2015年

8 王嬌紅;論我國(guó)婚內(nèi)夫妻共同財(cái)產(chǎn)分割制度的完善[D];華僑大學(xué);2015年

9 劉明U，

本文編號(hào)：2496067