本文選題：強(qiáng)制拍賣 + 拍賣　； 參考：《武漢大學(xué)》2015年博士論文

【摘要】：強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行拍賣作為民事強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行措施中的重要變價(jià)措施,其公開、公正、效率的特點(diǎn)使其作為民事強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行首要的執(zhí)行方式。我國(guó)在不斷司法實(shí)踐的過(guò)程中,逐步確立了強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行中的拍賣制度。其首次出現(xiàn)在我國(guó)1991年頒布的《民事訴訟法》,之后隨著我國(guó)民事強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行制度的不斷完善,強(qiáng)制拍賣制度對(duì)于確保民事執(zhí)行案件及時(shí)終結(jié),維護(hù)債權(quán)人合法權(quán)益,保障交易安全等方面的作用愈發(fā)顯著,學(xué)術(shù)界和立法界對(duì)強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行拍賣制度也更予以重視。我國(guó)尚未制定強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行法,有關(guān)強(qiáng)制拍賣的立法主要在司法解釋中規(guī)定。由于歷史原因,我國(guó)的強(qiáng)制拍賣立法依然比較落后,強(qiáng)制拍賣的研究相對(duì)滯后,學(xué)術(shù)界也沒(méi)有對(duì)強(qiáng)制拍賣的一些實(shí)體上問(wèn)題進(jìn)行探討,如：強(qiáng)制拍賣的無(wú)效與可撤銷、網(wǎng)絡(luò)拍賣在強(qiáng)制拍賣中的適用等等。本文也正是在已有研究的基礎(chǔ)上,就強(qiáng)制拍賣的這些問(wèn)題做一些嘗試性的探索。本文主要是結(jié)合我國(guó)現(xiàn)有的強(qiáng)制拍賣立法,從強(qiáng)制拍賣的性質(zhì)入手,在對(duì)國(guó)外以及我國(guó)臺(tái)灣地區(qū)對(duì)強(qiáng)制拍賣的規(guī)定做比較分析的基礎(chǔ)上結(jié)合我國(guó)的研究成果,對(duì)強(qiáng)制拍賣做比較深入的研究。同時(shí),立足于我國(guó)的社會(huì)現(xiàn)實(shí),總結(jié)司法實(shí)踐中的經(jīng)驗(yàn)教訓(xùn),從而對(duì)我國(guó)強(qiáng)制拍賣的立法提出自己的觀點(diǎn)。本文共五章,主要內(nèi)容如下：第一章是對(duì)強(qiáng)制拍賣的性質(zhì)進(jìn)行探討。本文首先對(duì)強(qiáng)制拍賣性質(zhì)學(xué)術(shù)爭(zhēng)議的三個(gè)主要觀點(diǎn)分別進(jìn)行了論證。接著比較分析了兩大法系對(duì)強(qiáng)制拍賣的相關(guān)立法規(guī)定,再結(jié)合我國(guó)的立法現(xiàn)狀,認(rèn)為我國(guó)強(qiáng)制拍賣性質(zhì)的應(yīng)有定位是用強(qiáng)制拍賣公法說(shuō)確定標(biāo)的物所有權(quán)于拍定人,同時(shí)通過(guò)賦予案外人其他救濟(jì)途徑的方法達(dá)到雙方利益的平衡。第二章研究的是強(qiáng)制拍賣與其他相關(guān)制度：一是強(qiáng)制拍賣與《拍賣法》,二是強(qiáng)制拍賣與一般拍賣,三是強(qiáng)制拍賣與公物拍賣,這三大問(wèn)題研究強(qiáng)制拍賣與其他制度的區(qū)別和聯(lián)系。對(duì)于強(qiáng)制拍賣與《拍賣法》,本文認(rèn)為我國(guó)強(qiáng)制拍賣規(guī)則體系和《拍賣法》是一種交叉的關(guān)系,而我國(guó)強(qiáng)制拍賣規(guī)則體系不甚完備也并非為最高人民法院的疏漏,而是考慮到《拍賣法》中的某些規(guī)定在強(qiáng)制拍賣中可適用無(wú)須重復(fù)規(guī)定。對(duì)于強(qiáng)制拍賣與一般拍賣,本文認(rèn)為兩者之間存在許多的區(qū)別與聯(lián)系。其中,在強(qiáng)制拍賣的各方法律主體方面,人民法院居于主體地位,人民法院與拍賣機(jī)構(gòu)之間是委托合同關(guān)系同時(shí)兼具協(xié)助執(zhí)行的性質(zhì)。在一人競(jìng)買的情形下,應(yīng)從正當(dāng)性以及合法性兩方面進(jìn)行分析,得出一人競(jìng)買行為若依法出現(xiàn)于強(qiáng)制拍賣中,強(qiáng)制拍賣程序依然有效。在強(qiáng)制拍賣與船舶拍賣方面,船舶拍賣應(yīng)優(yōu)先適用《海訴法》的規(guī)定。同時(shí),其在所有權(quán)的轉(zhuǎn)移方式與轉(zhuǎn)移時(shí)間方面也有較為特殊的規(guī)定。第三章是對(duì)強(qiáng)制拍賣的方式問(wèn)題進(jìn)行研究。本文認(rèn)為在采取拍賣方式時(shí)不能簡(jiǎn)單的規(guī)定采取一種方式來(lái)應(yīng)對(duì)強(qiáng)制拍賣中的各種情形,而只有根據(jù)標(biāo)的或者執(zhí)行中具體的情況來(lái)判斷采取不同的拍賣方式才能達(dá)到最優(yōu)的解決,同時(shí)可以考慮將法院自主拍賣或者委托拍賣的選擇權(quán)交由當(dāng)事人協(xié)商解決。并同時(shí)對(duì)強(qiáng)制拍賣中腐敗滋生的原因進(jìn)行了分析,并提出了需要預(yù)防競(jìng)買人妨害強(qiáng)制拍賣的行為。網(wǎng)絡(luò)拍賣這種新型的拍賣形式在強(qiáng)制拍賣中已經(jīng)得到了適用,然而其有一些規(guī)則是不能在強(qiáng)制拍賣中適用的,比如網(wǎng)絡(luò)拍賣中的后悔權(quán)。在強(qiáng)制拍賣中的價(jià)金支付方面,價(jià)金繳付應(yīng)當(dāng)可以適當(dāng)?shù)难悠?但需要在法律中對(duì)這種特殊情況進(jìn)行規(guī)定。在不按時(shí)繳納價(jià)金的情況下采取何種處理方式最為妥當(dāng)應(yīng)綜合拍賣物的基本行情以及買受人的財(cái)產(chǎn)狀況甚至案件的執(zhí)行情況進(jìn)行衡量。第四章是強(qiáng)制拍賣的效力。本文認(rèn)為強(qiáng)制拍賣的無(wú)效應(yīng)當(dāng)在法律中進(jìn)行明確規(guī)定,而我國(guó)現(xiàn)行僅在《拍賣法》第65條規(guī)定了一個(gè)無(wú)效的原因,無(wú)效的原因主要為執(zhí)行名義的瑕疵、公告程序的瑕疵、不按照?qǐng)?zhí)行機(jī)關(guān)指令進(jìn)行拍賣的行為、處分權(quán)瑕疵、拍賣標(biāo)的物系違禁物或者為第三人所有。在強(qiáng)制拍賣的瑕疵擔(dān)保問(wèn)題上,因?yàn)楸Ａ翳Υ脫?dān)保請(qǐng)求權(quán)不僅有價(jià)值更有相應(yīng)的代價(jià),其在給予買受人實(shí)質(zhì)正義的同時(shí),對(duì)于其他相關(guān)當(dāng)事人的權(quán)益會(huì)造成重大的影響。因此,人民法院在強(qiáng)制拍賣中原則上不承擔(dān)瑕疵責(zé)任,拍賣人與被執(zhí)行人因其過(guò)錯(cuò)承擔(dān)瑕疵責(zé)任。在強(qiáng)制拍賣有租賃權(quán)的財(cái)產(chǎn)中,本文認(rèn)為在《合同法》第229條增加“承租人占有中”這一限制條件將更有利于現(xiàn)實(shí)中強(qiáng)制拍賣中問(wèn)題的解決。同時(shí),在租賃權(quán)的除去方面,可以考慮借鑒我國(guó)臺(tái)灣地區(qū)法院除去租賃權(quán)裁定程序和拍賣后的點(diǎn)交命令程序。在誤拍誤賣第三人財(cái)產(chǎn)的情況下,相對(duì)于真正所有權(quán)的第三人而言,拍定人的利益應(yīng)該更值得保護(hù)。對(duì)于第三人權(quán)益的保護(hù)可分為兩部分進(jìn)行研究,即拍賣程序終結(jié)之前的程序保障與拍賣程序已經(jīng)終結(jié)之后的實(shí)體救濟(jì)。在同一標(biāo)的被兩個(gè)法院重復(fù)拍賣的效力方面,本文通過(guò)對(duì)于案例的分析,認(rèn)為此時(shí)應(yīng)從查封措施的對(duì)抗效力、拍賣標(biāo)的物所有權(quán)的轉(zhuǎn)移時(shí)間和造成重復(fù)拍賣的原因等方面綜合考量?jī)纱闻馁u的效力,在先拍賣的并不必然有效。第五章是對(duì)我國(guó)強(qiáng)制拍賣的檢討。本文指出了我國(guó)強(qiáng)制拍賣在申請(qǐng)執(zhí)行人和被執(zhí)行人權(quán)益保護(hù)、競(jìng)買人妨害強(qiáng)制拍賣行為以及無(wú)效的后果、救濟(jì)這幾個(gè)方面的解決方法。同時(shí),還研究了破產(chǎn)財(cái)產(chǎn)強(qiáng)制拍賣中存在的一些問(wèn)題。
[Abstract]:Compulsory execution auction as an important price measure in civil enforcement measures, its public, fair and efficient characteristics make it the primary execution mode of civil enforcement. In the process of continuous judicial practice, China has gradually established the auction system in compulsory enforcement. It first appeared in the Civil Procedure Law promulgated in 1991 in China. With the continuous improvement of the civil enforcement system in China, the compulsory auction system has become more and more important in ensuring the timely end of the civil execution cases, maintaining the legitimate rights and interests of the creditors and ensuring the safety of the transaction. The academic and legislative circles also pay more attention to the enforcement of the auction system. The legislation on compulsory auction is mainly stipulated in the judicial interpretation. Due to historical reasons, the compulsory auction legislation in China is still relatively backward, the research of compulsory auction is relatively lagging, and the academic circles have not discussed some entities on the compulsory auction, such as the invalid and revocable of compulsory auction, and the network auction in compulsory auction. On the basis of the existing research, this paper makes some tentative exploration on the problems of compulsory auction. This article is mainly based on the existing compulsory auction legislation in China, starting with the nature of compulsory auction, and combining with me on the basis of comparative analysis of compulsory auction in foreign countries and in Taiwan area of China. The research results of the country have made a thorough study of the compulsory auction. At the same time, based on the social reality of our country and summing up the experience and lessons of the judicial practice, the author puts forward his own views on the legislation of compulsory auction in China. The main contents of this paper are as follows: the first chapter is to discuss the nature of compulsory auction. The first chapter of this paper is to enforce the compulsory auction. The three main viewpoints of the academic controversy of the nature of the auction are demonstrated respectively. Then, the relevant legislative provisions of the compulsory auction of the two legal systems are compared and analyzed, and the present situation of our country's legislation is combined with the status of the legislation of our country. The second chapter studies the balance between the other means of relief. The second chapter studies compulsory auction and other related systems: one is compulsory auction and the auction law, the two is compulsory and general auction, the three is compulsory auction and public property auction, and the three major problems are to study the difference and connection between compulsory auction and other systems. Auction and auction law, this article thinks that China's compulsory auction rule system and the auction law are a cross relationship, but our compulsory auction rule system is not complete and not the omission for the Supreme People's court, but considering that some provisions in the auction law are not required to be repeated in the compulsory auction. In the general auction, there are many differences and connections between the two. Among them, the people's court is in the main position in the legal subject of the compulsory auction, and the people's court and the auction institution are the nature of the concurrently contract relationship. In the case of one person's bidding, it should be from legitimacy and legitimacy two On the basis of the analysis, it is concluded that the compulsory auction procedure is still valid if one person's bidding behavior appears in compulsory auction according to law. In the aspect of compulsory auction and ship auction, the ship auction should be given priority to the provisions of the "sea appeal". At the same time, the transfer mode and time of transfer of ownership are also more special. The third chapter is strong. It is considered that the auction method can not be used in a simple way to deal with the various situations in the compulsory auction, but only according to the standard or the implementation of the specific circumstances to judge the different ways to achieve the best solution, at the same time, we can consider the court self. The choice of the main auction or the entrustment auction is settled by the parties, and the causes of the corruption in the compulsory auction are analyzed, and the action of preventing the bidders from impairing the compulsory auction is put forward. The new form of the network auction has been applied in the compulsory auction, but there are some rules. It is not applicable in a compulsory auction, such as the right of regret in a network auction. In the payment of the price in a compulsory auction, the payment of the price should be properly postponed, but the special situation is required in the law. What kind of treatment is most appropriate to the basis of the comprehensive auction in cases where the price is not paid on time. This market and the status of the buyer's property and even the execution of the case are measured. The fourth chapter is the validity of the compulsory auction. This article holds that the invalidity of the compulsory auction should be clearly stipulated in the law, and the current only in the "Auction Law > sixty-fifth" stipulates an invalid reason, and the main reason for the invalid is the execution of the nominal defect. The defects of the announcement procedure shall not be auctioned in accordance with the instructions of the executive organ, the defect of the right of disposition, the object of the auction, or the third party. In the question of the defect guarantee of the compulsory auction, the claim for the reservation of the defect guarantee not only has the corresponding price, but also gives the buyer substantial justice, while it gives the buyer substantive justice. The rights and interests of other interested parties will have a significant impact. Therefore, the people's court does not bear the liability for the defect on the Central Plains of the compulsory auction, and the auctioneer and the executor assume the liability for defects due to their fault. In the property of the renting right of the compulsory auction, this article believes that the 229th article of the contract law increases the limit of the tenant possession in the contract law. It will be more conducive to the solution of the problems in compulsory auction in reality. At the same time, in the aspect of the removal of the lease right, we can consider using the Taiwan district court to remove the renting right ruling procedure and order the order after the auction. In the case of mistaken selling the property of third people, the profit of the person is compared to the third people of the real ownership. The protection of the interests should be more worthy of protection. The protection of the rights and interests of the third party can be divided into two parts, namely, the substantive relief after the end of the procedure guarantee and the auction procedure before the end of the auction procedure. In the same standard, the validity of the repeated auction by the two courts, by the analysis of the case, should be taken from the closure measures at this time. The effectiveness of the confrontation, the time of the transfer of the title of the object of the auction and the cause of the repeated auction are considered comprehensively in the two auction. The first auction is not necessarily effective. The fifth chapter is a review of the compulsory auction in China. This article points out that the rights and interests of the applicant and the executor are protected by the compulsory auction in China, and the bidders are harmful to the buyer. The compulsory auction and the consequences of ineffectiveness, relief methods, and some problems in the forced sale of bankrupt property are also discussed.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：武漢大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：D925.18

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前8條

1 連品方;陳賢貴;;拍定人與第三人利益平衡機(jī)制之構(gòu)建[J];河北科技大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2007年03期

2 李守芹;法院拍賣淺談[J];煙臺(tái)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);1989年03期

3 陳桂明,侍?hào)|波;民事執(zhí)行法中拍賣制度之理論基石——強(qiáng)制拍賣性質(zhì)之法律分析[J];政法論壇;2002年05期

4 肖建國(guó);論民事訴訟中強(qiáng)制拍賣的性質(zhì)和效力[J];北京科技大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2004年04期

5 范向陽(yáng);范欣珂;;試論強(qiáng)制拍賣無(wú)效[J];人民司法;2009年07期

6 盧正敏;齊樹潔;;論錯(cuò)誤拍賣第三人財(cái)產(chǎn)的法律效力——兼評(píng)《民事訴訟法》第204條之相關(guān)規(guī)定[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2010年01期

7 黎章輝;試論法院拍賣的性質(zhì)及其法律效力[J];河北法學(xué);1993年05期

8 ;[J];;年期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前2條

1 丁亮華;錯(cuò)誤執(zhí)行他人財(cái)產(chǎn)的權(quán)利救濟(jì)[N];人民法院報(bào);2006年

2 中國(guó)人民大學(xué)法學(xué)院副教授、法學(xué)博士 肖建國(guó);論民事執(zhí)行中拍賣物上負(fù)擔(dān)的處理[N];人民法院報(bào);2005年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 劉偉;強(qiáng)制拍賣問(wèn)題研究[D];武漢大學(xué);2015年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 吳建麗;試論我國(guó)的強(qiáng)制拍賣制度[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2003年

2 吳峗;法院強(qiáng)制拍賣制度法律問(wèn)題研究[D];華東政法大學(xué);2010年

，

本文編號(hào)：2004735