【摘要】： 代位權(quán)是大陸法系國(guó)家民事實(shí)體法中的概念，，我國(guó)一直到1999年實(shí)施的合同法才規(guī)定了代位權(quán)制度，因?yàn)槠湟?guī)定在合同法之中，因此也被認(rèn)為是一種實(shí)體法上的權(quán)利。而根據(jù)我國(guó)法律的規(guī)定，實(shí)體法上的代位權(quán)只能以訴訟方式進(jìn)行，因此可以說(shuō)，代位訴訟是隨著我國(guó)合同法的完善而出現(xiàn)的一種新型訴訟方式。合同法對(duì)債權(quán)人代位訴訟權(quán)的規(guī)定，突出了對(duì)債權(quán)人的保護(hù)，具有重大積極的意義。然而，任何實(shí)體法的條文總表現(xiàn)為一般的規(guī)范命題，其具體內(nèi)容必須通過(guò)一個(gè)個(gè)具體案件的處理才能顯示出來(lái)。換言之，實(shí)體法的內(nèi)容往往并非事先被預(yù)定了的不變的價(jià)值，而必須通過(guò)訴訟程序的進(jìn)行在一般規(guī)范命題框架內(nèi)逐漸形成。而代位權(quán)制度的內(nèi)在價(jià)值同樣必須通過(guò)訴訟程序即代位訴訟來(lái)實(shí)現(xiàn)與展開(kāi)。但由于長(zhǎng)期以來(lái)的“重實(shí)體，輕程序”的錯(cuò)誤思想，我國(guó)民法在總體上忽視程序機(jī)制，將訴訟程序統(tǒng)統(tǒng)交給民事訴訟法去規(guī)定，切斷了民法與民事訴訟法內(nèi)在的有機(jī)聯(lián)系。令人遺憾的是，《合同法》關(guān)于代位權(quán)的規(guī)定再次忽視了實(shí)現(xiàn)代位權(quán)的程序機(jī)制——代位訴訟，而事實(shí)上代位權(quán)的行使過(guò)程中問(wèn)題最多的就是在程序方面。代位訴訟作為一種新型的訴訟類(lèi)型，必然是過(guò)去實(shí)務(wù)中沒(méi)有遭遇過(guò)的，對(duì)代位訴訟制度的研究不僅可以促進(jìn)實(shí)體法的順利實(shí)行，同時(shí)，也是對(duì)我國(guó)民事訴訟理論的補(bǔ)充和發(fā)展。 本文首先對(duì)代位訴訟基本理論進(jìn)行了介紹，探討了代位訴訟的目的、性質(zhì)特征以及價(jià)值，同時(shí)也比較研究了國(guó)外主要的代位訴訟制度，借鑒其中的有益成分，并結(jié)合代位訴訟的基礎(chǔ)理論，從代位訴訟的訴訟標(biāo)的、當(dāng)事人適格、債務(wù)人地位等爭(zhēng)議較大的問(wèn)題著手，探討建立我國(guó)代位訴訟制度的思路和具體方案。其次，筆者根據(jù)代位訴訟的特點(diǎn)，結(jié)合司法實(shí)務(wù)，著重闡述了代位訴訟的程序問(wèn)題，使之更加方便操作，切實(shí)可行。最后，主要針對(duì)我國(guó)債權(quán)人代位權(quán)制度可操作性不強(qiáng)的弱點(diǎn)，提出了整合債權(quán)人代位權(quán)制度和對(duì)第三人強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行制度的觀點(diǎn)，并對(duì)如何整合這兩種制度提出了自己的建議。
[Abstract]:The right of subrogation is a concept in the civil substantive law of civil law countries in the continental law system. It was not until 1999 that the contract law of our country stipulated the system of subrogation, because it was stipulated in the contract law, so it is also considered as a kind of rights in substantive law. According to the law of our country, the right of subrogation in substantive law can only be carried out by way of litigation, so it can be said that subrogation is a new kind of litigation mode which appears with the perfection of contract law of our country. The stipulation of creditor's right of subrogation in contract law highlights the protection of creditor, which is of great positive significance. However, the provisions of any substantive law are always expressed as general normative propositions, and their specific contents must be dealt with one by one in order to be displayed. In other words, the content of substantive law is not the predetermined value, but must be gradually formed within the framework of the general normative proposition through the proceeding of legal proceedings. The intrinsic value of subrogation system must also be realized and carried out through the procedure of subrogation. However, due to the long wrong thought of "attaching importance to substance and neglecting procedure", the civil law of our country neglects the procedural mechanism in general, and gives the procedure to the civil procedure law to stipulate, thus cutting off the organic connection between the civil law and the civil procedure law. It is regrettable that the stipulation of the right of subrogation in contract Law again ignores the procedural mechanism of realizing subrogation-subrogation litigation. In fact, the most problematic aspect of the exercise of subrogation is in procedure. Subrogation litigation, as a new type of litigation, must have not been encountered in practice in the past. The study of subrogation litigation system can not only promote the smooth implementation of substantive law, but also complement and develop the theory of civil action in our country. This paper first introduces the basic theory of subrogation, discusses the purpose, nature and value of subrogation, and also compares and studies the main subrogation litigation systems in foreign countries. Based on the basic theory of subrogation, this paper probes into the train of thought and concrete scheme of establishing the subrogation litigation system in China from the controversial issues such as the subject matter of the subrogation action, the suitability of the parties and the status of the debtor. Secondly, according to the characteristics of subrogation, combined with judicial practice, the author focuses on the procedure of subrogation, making it more convenient and feasible. Finally, aiming at the weakness of the system of creditor's subrogation in our country, this paper puts forward the viewpoint of integrating the system of creditor's subrogation and the system of enforcing the third party, and puts forward some suggestions on how to integrate these two systems.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：四川大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2007
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D915.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王薇;試論代位權(quán)的性質(zhì)及實(shí)踐操作[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2003年02期

2 韓朝煒;債權(quán)人代位權(quán)訴訟管轄問(wèn)題探析[J];法律適用;2005年07期

3 賈玉平;論債權(quán)人代位權(quán)[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2001年04期

4 丘志喬;;代位權(quán)與代位執(zhí)行:并存還是歸一——對(duì)我國(guó)債權(quán)人代位權(quán)制度的思考[J];廣東社會(huì)科學(xué);2006年04期

5 陳玉珍;債權(quán)人代位權(quán)之理論及其行使研究[J];廣西財(cái)政高等�？茖W(xué)校學(xué)報(bào);2003年01期

6 劉莉穎;由個(gè)案透視代位權(quán)訴訟的若干問(wèn)題——國(guó)都財(cái)務(wù)公司訴華貿(mào)財(cái)務(wù)公司、永宏公司一案引發(fā)的思考[J];廣西政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2004年03期

7 胡興元;淺議代位權(quán)的行使[J];安徽警官職業(yè)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2005年02期

8 陳洪宗,賈樹(shù)學(xué);論代位權(quán)訴訟的當(dāng)事人問(wèn)題[J];青島科技大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2002年04期

9 趙君,陳穎;代位權(quán)制度若干問(wèn)題討論[J];青海社會(huì)科學(xué);2004年05期

10 趙鋼,劉學(xué)在;論代位權(quán)訴訟[J];法學(xué)研究;2000年06期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前5條

1 湯自軍;略論代位權(quán)訴訟[D];湘潭大學(xué);2005年

2 周井瑞;代位權(quán)訴訟的若干問(wèn)題[D];湘潭大學(xué);2005年

3 任緯;代位訴訟既判力問(wèn)題研究[D];黑龍江大學(xué);2004年

4 李小明;代位權(quán)訴訟研究[D];湘潭大學(xué);2003年

5 李永安;債權(quán)人代位訴訟研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2002年

本文編號(hào)：2378033