發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-04-03 00:14

  本文選題：協(xié)議管轄　切入點(diǎn)：電子商務(wù)糾紛　出處：《安徽大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：伴隨著電子信息時(shí)代的飛速發(fā)展,人們的生活方式發(fā)生了巨大的改變。人們的生活日益離不開(kāi)網(wǎng)絡(luò),從購(gòu)物到工作,無(wú)不可以通過(guò)網(wǎng)絡(luò)來(lái)完成,催生了電子商務(wù)的繁榮發(fā)展�；ヂ�(lián)網(wǎng)具有虛擬性和跨地域性,因此,電子商務(wù)糾紛與傳統(tǒng)的民事糾紛存在著很大的不同。電子商務(wù)糾紛的解決刻不容緩,而關(guān)于協(xié)議管轄的糾紛在電子商務(wù)糾紛中占有很大的比例。實(shí)務(wù)中電子商務(wù)糾紛的協(xié)議管轄權(quán)是根據(jù)民訴法關(guān)于民事管轄的一般規(guī)定來(lái)確定的,并沒(méi)有特別的規(guī)定。民事訴訟法三十四條規(guī)定的協(xié)議管轄的五個(gè)連接點(diǎn)在電子商務(wù)中并不合適。如何解決這類問(wèn)題,如何完善協(xié)議管轄制度使其能更好應(yīng)用于電子商務(wù)糾紛中去,也日益受到法律界和學(xué)術(shù)界關(guān)注。協(xié)議管轄,又稱為約定管轄。參照不同的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)可將協(xié)議管轄作出不一樣的分類。比如,以是否包含涉外因素,協(xié)議管轄可區(qū)分為國(guó)內(nèi)和涉外民事案件協(xié)議管轄兩類。以當(dāng)事人是否以明示作為其意思表示形式作為區(qū)分的標(biāo)準(zhǔn),協(xié)議管轄又可區(qū)分為明示的協(xié)議管轄和默示的協(xié)議管轄。以當(dāng)事人之間的協(xié)議是否具有排他性作為區(qū)分的標(biāo)準(zhǔn),協(xié)議管轄則可區(qū)分為排他性的協(xié)議管轄和非排他性的協(xié)議管轄。作為一種制度,適用協(xié)議管轄需具備相應(yīng)的條件。而協(xié)議管轄制度則經(jīng)歷了從沒(méi)有到有、從不是很完善到逐步被完善的過(guò)程。伴隨著信息時(shí)代,把互聯(lián)網(wǎng)作為載體的電子商務(wù)逐漸的發(fā)展了起來(lái)。在電子商務(wù)中,當(dāng)事人的管轄權(quán)協(xié)議大多是包含在格式合同中,因此電子商務(wù)中的協(xié)議管轄的協(xié)議方式多表現(xiàn)為格式條款。在電子商務(wù)各方交易過(guò)程中,關(guān)于電子商務(wù)糾紛案件管轄權(quán)的確立有層出不窮的問(wèn)題。比如孫丁丁訴江蘇蘇寧易購(gòu)電子商務(wù)有限公司一案,就反應(yīng)了司法實(shí)踐中如何界定經(jīng)營(yíng)者已經(jīng)采取合理方式提請(qǐng)其消費(fèi)者注意,沒(méi)有統(tǒng)一的標(biāo)準(zhǔn),以及怎樣的方式可以被認(rèn)定為是合理方式很難界定。電子商務(wù)糾紛中被告住所地、合同履行地、合同簽訂地很難確定,部分案件若是直接適用協(xié)議管轄則會(huì)出現(xiàn)顯失公平的現(xiàn)象。這些都對(duì)當(dāng)下的協(xié)議管轄制度造成了很大的沖擊。我們要完善協(xié)議管轄制度,以使其能更好的解決電子商務(wù)糾紛。為此,首先,電子商務(wù)糾紛案件的協(xié)議管轄制度應(yīng)堅(jiān)持三原則,它們分別是同等保護(hù)之原則、便利訴訟之原則和意思自治之原則。其次,我們要為電子商務(wù)糾紛案件的協(xié)議管轄制度確立消費(fèi)者住所地管轄規(guī)則和將網(wǎng)址作為新的管轄連接點(diǎn)之規(guī)則。最后,協(xié)議管轄需要被進(jìn)行必要的限制,我們可以把以合理方式提請(qǐng)消費(fèi)者注意的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)進(jìn)行細(xì)化。
[Abstract]:With the rapid development of electronic information age, people's way of life has undergone tremendous changes.People's life is increasingly inseparable from the network, from shopping to work, can be completed through the network, ecommerce prosperity and development.Internet is virtual and cross-regional, so there is a great difference between e-commerce disputes and traditional civil disputes.The settlement of e-commerce dispute is urgent, and the dispute about agreement jurisdiction occupies a large proportion in e-commerce dispute.In practice, the agreement jurisdiction of electronic commerce disputes is determined according to the general provisions of civil jurisdiction in civil litigation law, and there are no special provisions.The five points of connection governed by agreement under article 34 of the Code of Civil procedure are not appropriate in e-commerce.How to solve this kind of problems and how to perfect the agreement jurisdiction system so that it can be better applied in the dispute of electronic commerce has been paid more and more attention by the legal and academic circles.Agreement jurisdiction, also known as contract jurisdiction.Agreement jurisdiction may be classified differently by reference to different criteria.For example, according to whether to include foreign factors, the jurisdiction of agreement can be divided into two categories: domestic and foreign civil cases.The agreement jurisdiction can be divided into express agreement jurisdiction and implied agreement jurisdiction.The criterion of whether the agreement between the parties is exclusive or not, the agreement jurisdiction can be divided into exclusive agreement jurisdiction and non-exclusive agreement jurisdiction.As a kind of system, the applicable agreement jurisdiction must have the corresponding condition.But the agreement jurisdiction system has experienced from no to have, never is very perfect to be perfected step by step.With the information age, the Internet as a carrier of e-commerce has gradually developed.In electronic commerce, the parties' jurisdiction agreement is mostly included in the format contract, so the agreement in the electronic commerce is mostly embodied in the form clause.In the course of dealing with each side of e-commerce, the establishment of the jurisdiction of the dispute case of e-commerce arises in endlessly.For example, the case of Sun Dingding v. Jiangsu Su Ning E-Commerce Co., Ltd. reflects how to define in judicial practice how the operator has taken a reasonable approach to draw his consumers' attention to the fact that there is no uniform standard.And how it can be considered reasonable is difficult to define.It is difficult to determine the place where the defendant is domiciled, the place where the contract is performed and the place where the contract is signed in electronic commerce disputes.All these have had a great impact on the current system of agreement jurisdiction.We must perfect the agreement jurisdiction system, in order to enable it to solve the electronic commerce dispute better.Therefore, first of all, the agreed jurisdiction system of electronic commerce dispute cases should adhere to three principles, they are the principle of equal protection, the principle of facilitating litigation and the principle of autonomy of will.Secondly, we should establish the rules of jurisdiction of consumer domicile and the rule of using web site as the new jurisdiction link for electronic commerce dispute cases.Finally, jurisdiction needs to be limited as necessary, and we can refine the criteria that are brought to the attention of consumers in a reasonable manner.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：安徽大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D925.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前2條

1 邵明;;我國(guó)涉外民事訴訟程序之完善[J];中國(guó)人民大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2012年04期

2 奚曉明;論我國(guó)涉外民商事訴訟中協(xié)議管轄條款的認(rèn)定(下)[J];法律適用(國(guó)家法官學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));2002年04期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 董倩;論電子商務(wù)中消費(fèi)者的權(quán)益保護(hù)[D];首都經(jīng)濟(jì)貿(mào)易大學(xué);2011年

2 張旭東;國(guó)際民事訴訟管轄權(quán)比較研究[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2006年

，

本文編號(hào)：1702757