發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-03-08 10:13

  本文選題：存量房　切入點(diǎn)：惡意違約　出處：《廈門大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：在房地產(chǎn)市場(chǎng)上,存量房買賣日趨活躍,隨之產(chǎn)生了一系列關(guān)于存量房買賣的惡意違約問題。由于法律關(guān)系復(fù)雜,司法適用缺失以及市場(chǎng)趨利性等原因,對(duì)于該問題的規(guī)制應(yīng)對(duì)方法存在不少爭(zhēng)議,處理方式也頗為棘手。合理規(guī)制存量房買賣惡意違約問題,不僅能最大限度保護(hù)守約方的合法權(quán)益,還能凈化現(xiàn)階段的房地產(chǎn)交易市場(chǎng)。從法律層面角度看,本文結(jié)合了對(duì)民法理論中違約行為、誠(chéng)實(shí)信用原則、懲罰性賠償制度等方面的分析,總結(jié)出目前常見的四種存量房買賣惡意違約行為,并從“惡意”這個(gè)概念的法律分析和惡意違約責(zé)任的應(yīng)受懲罰性論證角度著手,提出對(duì)規(guī)制這類法律糾紛的適用依據(jù),明晰各方的舉證責(zé)任以及完善相應(yīng)的懲罰性賠償制度,以期能有序的引導(dǎo)房地產(chǎn)市場(chǎng)朝健康化、規(guī)�；l(fā)展。 根據(jù)以上思路,全文共分三個(gè)部分來(lái)展開論述： 第一部分主要概述存量房買賣的數(shù)據(jù)及其產(chǎn)生的法律糾紛等現(xiàn)狀,并從法律層面和現(xiàn)實(shí)層面闡釋這類糾紛產(chǎn)生的原因,在法律分析的基礎(chǔ)上指出當(dāng)前存量房買賣惡意違約的存在的典型法律問題。 第二部分著重從存量房買賣的違約責(zé)任要件建構(gòu)入手,分為惡意違約的主觀認(rèn)定、違反法定義務(wù)或者約定義務(wù)的行為及惡意違約行為超越懲罰標(biāo)準(zhǔn)三個(gè)視角,以案例分析與法理論證相結(jié)合的方式予以詳實(shí)說(shuō)明,從而將存量房買賣的惡意違約問題類型化和規(guī)范化。 第三部分引入對(duì)于規(guī)制存量房買賣惡意違約的理論分析,在綜合考量各方面法律影響要素的前提下,一方面提出引入誠(chéng)實(shí)信用原則作為規(guī)制存量房買賣惡意違約制度的根基,將誠(chéng)實(shí)信用原則具體內(nèi)化到存量房買賣惡意違約的法律適用上,另一方面通過引用、完善懲罰性賠償制度,尤其是在綜合考量社會(huì)、個(gè)人等多方面因素的情況下,合理確定賠償額度,進(jìn)而對(duì)存量房買賣的惡意違約進(jìn)行相應(yīng)程度的規(guī)范。
[Abstract]:In the real estate market, the stock house sale becomes more and more active, resulting in a series of malicious breach of contract problems about the stock house sale. Because of the complicated legal relationship, the lack of judicial application and the market trend, etc. There are a lot of disputes about the regulation of this problem, and the way to deal with it is quite difficult. To regulate the malicious breach of contract in stock house sale can not only protect the lawful rights and interests of the conformant to the maximum extent, but also be difficult to deal with. It can also purify the real estate transaction market at this stage. From the legal point of view, this paper combines the analysis of breach of contract in the theory of civil law, the principle of good faith, the system of punitive damages, and so on. This paper sums up four kinds of malicious breach of contract in stock house sale and puts forward the applicable basis for regulating this kind of legal dispute from the legal analysis of the concept of "malice" and the argumentation of the liability for malicious breach of contract. Clear the burden of proof and improve the corresponding punitive damages system, in order to guide the real estate market towards a healthy, large-scale development. According to the above ideas, the thesis is divided into three parts:. The first part mainly summarizes the data of stock house purchase and sale and the current situation of legal disputes, and explains the causes of such disputes from the legal and practical aspects. On the basis of legal analysis, this paper points out the typical legal problems existing in malicious breach of contract. The second part focuses on the construction of the liability for breach of contract, including the subjective determination of malicious breach of contract, the violation of legal or contractual obligations and the violation of malicious breach of contract beyond the penalty standard. In order to classify and standardize the problem of malicious breach of contract in stock house sale, the case analysis and legal argumentation are combined to explain it in detail. The third part introduces the theoretical analysis of the regulation of malicious breach of contract in the stock purchase and sale. On the premise of synthetically considering the various factors of legal influence, on the one hand, it puts forward the principle of good faith as the basis of the regulation of malicious breach of contract in the purchase and sale of the stock house. The principle of good faith is specifically internalized into the legal application of malicious breach of contract in stock housing. On the other hand, the system of punitive damages is improved through quoting, especially in the case of comprehensive consideration of various factors, such as society, individuals, and so on. Reasonable determination of the amount of compensation, and then the stock of malicious breach of contract to a corresponding degree of regulation.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：廈門大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D923

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王利明;重新認(rèn)識(shí)“消費(fèi)者”[J];北京工商;2003年12期

2 韓世遠(yuǎn);;商品房買賣中的遲延損害、違約金與時(shí)效[J];法律適用;2010年11期

3 初澤;;二手經(jīng)濟(jì)適用住房買賣合同糾紛中合同效力的認(rèn)定[J];法律適用;2012年03期

4 杜景林;;現(xiàn)代買賣法瑕疵擔(dān)保責(zé)任制度的定位[J];法商研究;2010年03期

5 寧紅麗;;論合同類型的認(rèn)定[J];法商研究;2011年06期

6 余藝;;懲罰性賠償責(zé)任的成立及其數(shù)額量定——以懲罰性賠償之功能實(shí)現(xiàn)為視角[J];法學(xué)雜志;2008年01期

7 劉貴祥;;論無(wú)權(quán)處分和善意取得的沖突和協(xié)調(diào)——以私賣夫妻共有房屋時(shí)買受人的保護(hù)為中心[J];法學(xué)家;2011年05期

8 柳經(jīng)緯;;當(dāng)代中國(guó)私法進(jìn)程中的民商事司法解釋[J];法學(xué)家;2012年02期

9 徐國(guó)棟;;我國(guó)司法適用誠(chéng)信原則情況考察[J];法學(xué);2012年04期

10 齊圓;;論我國(guó)懲罰性賠償制度的立法完善[J];廣東社會(huì)科學(xué);2012年03期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前1條

1 本報(bào)記者 王松才;[N];中國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)時(shí)報(bào);2013年

，

本文編號(hào)：1583466