發(fā)布時間：2018-03-11 01:23

  本文選題：信托　切入點(diǎn)：無效信托　出處：《西南政法大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：從最初的用益制到現(xiàn)代的信托,信托這一制度在英國經(jīng)過曲折的發(fā)展道路成為當(dāng)今世界最流行的財產(chǎn)管理手段。隨著全球經(jīng)濟(jì)的迅速發(fā)展,大陸法系國家認(rèn)識到信托的巨大作用,紛紛引進(jìn)了這一先進(jìn)制度。信托的發(fā)展離不開英國衡平法的土壤,但是大陸法系國家的法律制度與英美法系有著天壤之別,信托在移植到大陸法系國家之后,對既有的法律制度造成巨大的沖擊。與此同時,大陸法系國家也根據(jù)自身情況對信托制度進(jìn)行了獨(dú)特的改造,如規(guī)定訴訟信托和討債信托為無效信托。無效信托作為信托制度的重要組成部分,是法律平衡個人自由價值和社會公平價值的特殊手段,在信托制度中扮演者重要的角色。英美法系通過頒布成文法和大量的判例將無效信托予以制度化,而大陸法系國家由于沒有判例法的傳統(tǒng),只能依靠成文法對無效信托進(jìn)行規(guī)定。信托的靈活與創(chuàng)新決定了無效信托并不是簡單的幾個條文就能進(jìn)行規(guī)定的,大陸法系成文法的傳統(tǒng)劣勢在此暴露無遺。為了避免信托無效之后出現(xiàn)權(quán)利的真空狀態(tài),法律會對某些無效信托進(jìn)行救濟(jì),而其中最重要的手段就是通過回復(fù)信托對無效信托的信托財產(chǎn)進(jìn)行返還,以達(dá)到利益平衡�；貜�(fù)信托是由英國早期的回復(fù)用益發(fā)展起來的一種法定信托,發(fā)展到現(xiàn)代社會,回復(fù)信托的范圍擴(kuò)展到了無效信托領(lǐng)域,其重點(diǎn)關(guān)注信托無效后的“財產(chǎn)返還”問題,對于平衡信托當(dāng)事人的利益有著先天的優(yōu)勢。大陸法系國家的信托法大多規(guī)定了無效信托,卻鮮有國家對無效信托的法律后果進(jìn)行規(guī)定,因此只能借助于既有的法律制度來對無效信托進(jìn)行救濟(jì),如無因管理、不當(dāng)?shù)美秃贤?guī)則等等,但適用這些制度會產(chǎn)生諸多新的問題。我國《信托法》第11條對無效信托的類型進(jìn)行了詳細(xì)的列舉,卻沒有對無效信托的法律后果進(jìn)行規(guī)定,在信托被判定無效之后,當(dāng)事人也只能借助于既有的法律制度尋求救濟(jì),其中問題頗多。借鑒英美法系國家的制度,引進(jìn)回復(fù)信托制度無疑是完善我國無效信托制度的一種有益的嘗試。目前有學(xué)者認(rèn)為我國若引入回復(fù)信托制度將會面臨諸多阻礙,例如物權(quán)法定主義和一物一權(quán)原則。實(shí)際上,物權(quán)法定主義和一物一權(quán)原則在實(shí)質(zhì)上并沒有對回復(fù)信托的引進(jìn)造成阻礙,引進(jìn)回復(fù)信托最大的困難在于對信托當(dāng)事人的保護(hù)機(jī)制的設(shè)計與利益平衡。
[Abstract]:From the initial use-benefit system to the modern trust system, the trust system has become the most popular means of property management in the world after a tortuous development in the United Kingdom. With the rapid development of the global economy, the trust system has become the most popular means of property management in the world. The countries of civil law system realized the great role of trust and introduced this advanced system one after another. The development of trust can not be separated from the soil of British equity law. However, the legal system of civil law system countries is very different from that of common law system. After the trust has been transplanted to the countries of the continental law system, it has caused a great impact on the existing legal system. At the same time, the countries of the civil law system have also made a unique reform of the trust system according to their own conditions. If litigation trust and debt collection trust are defined as invalid trust, as an important part of trust system, invalid trust is a special means of balancing the value of individual freedom and social equity by law. Plays an important role in the trust system. The common law system institutionalizes invalid trusts through the enactment of statutory law and a large number of precedents, while civil law countries have no tradition of case law, We can only rely on the statute law to regulate the invalid trust. The flexibility and innovation of the trust determines that the invalid trust can not be regulated by a few simple articles. In order to avoid a vacuum in rights after the invalidity of the trust, the law provides relief to certain invalid trusts. Among them, the most important means is to return the trust property of the invalid trust through the restoration trust, so as to achieve the balance of interests. The restoration trust is a kind of legal trust developed from the early recovery interest in England and developed into the modern society. The scope of the reply trust is extended to the field of invalid trust, which focuses on the "return of property" after the invalidation of the trust. There is an inherent advantage in balancing the interests of trust parties. Most trust laws in civil law countries provide for invalid trusts, but few countries regulate the legal consequences of invalid trusts. Therefore, it is only possible to resort to the existing legal system to remedy invalid trusts, such as non-cause management, improper enrichment, contractual rules, etc. However, the application of these systems will lead to many new problems. Article 11 of China's Trust Law enumerates the types of invalid trusts in detail, but does not provide for the legal consequences of invalid trusts. The parties can only seek relief with the aid of the existing legal system, among which there are many problems. It is undoubtedly a useful attempt to perfect the system of invalid trust in our country. At present, some scholars think that China will face many obstacles if it is introduced, such as the doctrine of property law and the principle of "one thing, one right". In essence, the principle of the legal doctrine of real right and the principle of "one thing, one right" does not hinder the introduction of the return trust. The greatest difficulty of the introduction of the return trust lies in the design of the protection mechanism and the balance of interests of the trust parties.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D922.282

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 張鵬;;物債二分體系下的物權(quán)法定[J];中國法學(xué);2013年06期

2 趙磊;;信托受托人的角色定位及其制度實(shí)現(xiàn)[J];中國法學(xué);2013年04期

3 李培鋒;;英美信托財產(chǎn)權(quán)難以融入大陸法物權(quán)體系的根源[J];環(huán)球法律評論;2009年05期

4 張淳;;無效信托論——來自信托比較法角度的審視[J];南京大學(xué)法律評論;2009年02期

5 王涌;;論信托法與物權(quán)法的關(guān)系——信托法在民法法系中的問題[J];北京大學(xué)學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2008年06期

6 胡鴻高;;論公共利益的法律界定——從要素解釋的路徑[J];中國法學(xué);2008年04期

7 張淳;;我國信托財產(chǎn)所有權(quán)歸屬的態(tài)度及其法理審視[J];甘肅政法學(xué)院學(xué)報;2007年05期

8 鄭瑞琨;;信托法與物權(quán)法定原則的沖突及其解決[J];政法論壇;2007年04期

9 溫世揚(yáng),馮興俊;論信托財產(chǎn)所有權(quán)——兼論我國相關(guān)立法的完善[J];武漢大學(xué)學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2005年02期

10 張千帆;“公共利益”是什么?——社會功利主義的定義及其憲法上的局限性[J];法學(xué)論壇;2005年01期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 曲天明;無效信托行為的理論與實(shí)踐研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2012年

，

本文編號：1595967