發(fā)布時間：2018-01-04 10:20

  本文關(guān)鍵詞：“兇宅”買賣合同的效力　出處：《上海交通大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

  更多相關(guān)文章： 兇宅 善良風(fēng)俗 瑕疵 告知義務(wù)

【摘要】：近10年來，我國房地產(chǎn)二手房買賣市場出現(xiàn)了多起“兇宅”買賣合同的糾紛，司法實(shí)踐及學(xué)界對處理此類糾紛提出了不一樣的判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。目前我國的法律沒有關(guān)于此類糾紛的相關(guān)規(guī)定。本文擬以兇宅買賣合同的法律效力為主要研究對象，通過分析兇宅的界定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，梳理相關(guān)案例和學(xué)說，就兇宅買賣合同效力問題提出自己的看法。 本文除前言和結(jié)語外，由三個部分構(gòu)成： 本文第一部分“‘兇宅’的界定”，分析了社會對“兇宅”的認(rèn)識和理解因人而異，，呈現(xiàn)多樣性，整理了學(xué)界關(guān)于“兇宅”認(rèn)定的兩種學(xué)說即限定說和擴(kuò)張說。限定說主張認(rèn)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)應(yīng)嚴(yán)格，限制于發(fā)生在房屋內(nèi)部，因人為因素和現(xiàn)場致死的房屋；擴(kuò)張說在限定說的基礎(chǔ)上，將范圍擴(kuò)充至發(fā)生意外事件和非正常死亡事件的房屋以及房屋所處地段敏感和曾和違法沾邊的房屋。 本文第二部“相關(guān)案例和合同效力學(xué)說”，梳理了域外和國內(nèi)的相關(guān)案例，主要介紹了我國臺灣和香港地區(qū)的案例以及英國和美國的案例并整理了關(guān)于兇宅買賣合同效力的學(xué)說即有效說和無效說。有效說以物之瑕疵和“買者自負(fù)”為切入點(diǎn)，而無效說則以誠實(shí)信用原則和披露義務(wù)為根據(jù)。在此基礎(chǔ)上，整理分析了國內(nèi)相關(guān)案例和學(xué)說。我國司法實(shí)踐判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)不一，其判定合同效力的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)可分為五種類型。國內(nèi)學(xué)說意見也有分歧，有效說以合同目的、合同意思自治、瑕疵擔(dān)保責(zé)任和侵權(quán)責(zé)任為依據(jù)，無效說則以公序良俗原則和誠實(shí)信用原則為依據(jù)。 本文最后一部分“‘兇宅’買賣合同效力之我見”，首先，在兇宅界定方面，贊同界定限定說，并主張“兇宅”的界定，應(yīng)以符合客觀性、嚴(yán)重性或異常性、場所的局限性、直接因果性和時效性五個條件為判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。其次，在兇宅合同效力方面，主張“兇宅”非屬善良風(fēng)俗，不應(yīng)適用公序良俗原則；兇宅的法律性質(zhì)為瑕疵之物，出賣人應(yīng)承擔(dān)瑕疵擔(dān)保責(zé)任；出賣人違反誠實(shí)信用原則，未盡告知義務(wù)，應(yīng)承擔(dān)締約過失責(zé)任。
[Abstract]:In the past 10 years, there have been many disputes on the sale of second-hand real estate houses in China. Judicial practice and academic circles to deal with such disputes put forward a different standard of judgment. At present, there are no relevant provisions on such disputes in the law of our country. This article intends to focus on the legal effect of the purchase and sale contract for the main object of study. By analyzing the definition standard of the house, combing the relevant cases and theories, the author puts forward his own views on the validity of the contract. In addition to the preface and conclusion, this paper consists of three parts: In the first part of this paper, "the definition of" villainy ", the author analyzes the social understanding and understanding of" villainy ", which varies from person to person and presents diversity. The author collates the two theories about the identification of "fierce house" in academic circles, that is, the theory of limitation and the theory of expansion, which advocates that the standard of identification should be strict and be limited to the house that occurs inside the house and is killed by human factors and the scene; On a limited basis, the expansion extends to homes where accidents and deaths occur, as well as homes that are in sensitive locations and have been exposed to illegal practices. The second part of this article "related cases and contract effectiveness theory", combing the extraterritorial and domestic related cases. This paper mainly introduces the cases of Taiwan and Hong Kong and the cases of the United Kingdom and the United States, and collates the theories about the validity of the contract of sale and purchase of the home, that is, the effective theory and the invalid theory. The effective theory is based on the defect of goods and the "buyer's ego". As a starting point. On the basis of the principle of good faith and the obligation of disclosure, the author collates and analyzes the relevant domestic cases and theories. The judgment standard of judicial practice is different in our country. The criteria for judging the validity of the contract can be divided into five types. There are different opinions in the domestic doctrine, which is based on the purpose of the contract, autonomy of the meaning of the contract, liability for guarantee against defects and liability for tort. The theory of invalidity is based on the principle of public order and good faith. In the last part of this paper, "my opinion on the effect of the contract of purchase and sale of the 'fierce house'", first of all, in the definition of the fierce house, the author agrees with the definition of the definition and advocates that the definition of the "fierce house" should conform to the objectivity, seriousness or abnormal nature. The limitation of the place, the direct causality and the timeliness are the judgment criteria. Secondly, in the aspect of the effectiveness of the contract, it is advocated that the "fierce house" is not a kind custom, and the principle of public order and good custom should not be applied. If the legal nature of the house is defective, the seller shall bear the responsibility for the guarantee of the defect; If the seller violates the principle of good faith and fails to fulfill the obligation to inform, he shall be liable for contracting negligence.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：上海交通大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D923.6

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 劉娥;;論“兇宅”糾紛處理的法律適用[J];長沙大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2009年06期

2 杜景林;;買賣法中瑕疵權(quán)利的規(guī)制問題[J];法學(xué);2009年05期

3 陳耀東;張瑾;;對“兇宅”交易的法律思考[J];中國房地產(chǎn);2007年02期

4 念一;;購買“兇宅”引發(fā)的官司[J];公民導(dǎo)刊;2010年04期

5 劉春英;;誠實(shí)信用原則綜論[J];河北法學(xué);2006年05期

6 陳耀東;張瑾;;“兇宅”的法律限定及其交易糾紛的法律適用[J];河北法學(xué);2007年10期

7 王慧鋒;;公序良俗原則法律適用的判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)探析[J];哈爾濱學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2009年06期

8 徐國棟;誠實(shí)信用原則二題[J];法學(xué)研究;2002年04期

9 鄭法;;公序良俗了斷出售“兇宅”案[J];民主與法制;2009年09期

10 吳進(jìn)福;;涉及“兇宅”糾紛案件的處理問題探討[J];人民司法;2006年09期

本文編號：1378098