本文關(guān)鍵詞：人身侵權(quán)債權(quán)在破產(chǎn)清償中的順位研究　出處：《吉林大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

  更多相關(guān)文章： 破產(chǎn)債權(quán) 清償順位 人身侵權(quán)債權(quán) 優(yōu)先權(quán) 權(quán)利位階

【摘要】：根據(jù)破產(chǎn)法的規(guī)定,企業(yè)進(jìn)入破產(chǎn)程序就意味著其已失去了清償?shù)狡趥鶆?wù)的能力,或資產(chǎn)不足以清償全部債務(wù),或已明顯缺乏清償能力。此時(shí),債權(quán)人的債務(wù)能否得到償付取決于其債權(quán)是否具備優(yōu)先受償性以及該債權(quán)優(yōu)先受償?shù)男ЯΥ笮　奈覈飘a(chǎn)法出臺(tái)后,人身侵權(quán)債權(quán)一直作為普通債權(quán)最后清償,這一順位未曾改變過。但是隨著時(shí)代的變化,市場經(jīng)濟(jì)日益發(fā)展,立法過程中對(duì)人文關(guān)懷的逐漸側(cè)重,尤其是日前人身侵權(quán)案件數(shù)量逐漸上升,破產(chǎn)法對(duì)人身侵權(quán)債權(quán)賠償順位的規(guī)定越來越受到各方的質(zhì)疑。在人身侵權(quán)案件中,債權(quán)人在身體健康受到侵害的同時(shí),還需支付一筆高額的醫(yī)療費(fèi)用。因此人身侵權(quán)債權(quán)人的債務(wù)能否得以償付,不僅關(guān)系到債權(quán)人的生命健康,還關(guān)系到債權(quán)人及其家人的基本生活保障,甚至?xí)绊懙缴鐣?huì)秩序的穩(wěn)定。因此,筆者認(rèn)為,人身侵權(quán)債權(quán)與以合同債權(quán)為代表的普通債權(quán)存在根本性的區(qū)別,將二者置于同一清償順位是不合理的。因此,在人身侵權(quán)案件日益增加、尤其是大規(guī)模侵權(quán)案件層出的今天,是否應(yīng)賦予人身侵權(quán)債權(quán)人優(yōu)先受償權(quán)、賦予其多大程度的優(yōu)先權(quán)以及如何平衡其與擔(dān)保債權(quán)人、勞動(dòng)債權(quán)人以及國家的利益是目前破產(chǎn)法立法與實(shí)踐中面對(duì)的難題。本文采用比較分析法、案例分析法和歷史分析法對(duì)人身侵權(quán)債權(quán)在破產(chǎn)清償中的順位問題進(jìn)行了探究。本文除引言和結(jié)語外共分為四部分:第一部分,主要研究了破產(chǎn)清償順位的基本問題。首先確定了破產(chǎn)清償順位的基本概念與其設(shè)定的意義;其次通過對(duì)外國破產(chǎn)法中清償順位問題的研究對(duì)比,指出雖然目前少有國家明確規(guī)定人身侵權(quán)債權(quán)在破產(chǎn)清償中具有優(yōu)先受償?shù)匚?但給予人身侵權(quán)債權(quán)一定的保護(hù)是目前的立法趨勢(shì);最后介紹了我國破產(chǎn)清償順位的立法發(fā)展問題。第二部分,對(duì)我國現(xiàn)行人身侵權(quán)債權(quán)的清償順位進(jìn)行介紹與分析。首先介紹破產(chǎn)法背景下人身侵權(quán)債權(quán)的概念及特征,然后介紹我國關(guān)于人身侵權(quán)債權(quán)清償順位的規(guī)定,最后指出我國現(xiàn)行人身侵權(quán)債權(quán)清償順位的不足。第三部分,對(duì)人身侵權(quán)債權(quán)優(yōu)先受償?shù)谋匾赃M(jìn)行理論分析。從破產(chǎn)優(yōu)先權(quán)的立法基礎(chǔ)入手,結(jié)合人身侵權(quán)債權(quán)優(yōu)先受償?shù)谋匾?并借鑒美國理論界為解決此問題提出的方案,以求對(duì)我國破產(chǎn)清償順位有所啟示。第四部分,通過對(duì)人身侵權(quán)債權(quán)與擔(dān)保債權(quán)、破產(chǎn)費(fèi)用和共益?zhèn)鶆?wù)、勞動(dòng)債權(quán)及稅收債權(quán)的比較分析,確定人身侵權(quán)債權(quán)的具體清償位次以及各債權(quán)需優(yōu)先受償?shù)姆秶?對(duì)破產(chǎn)清償順位進(jìn)行重新規(guī)劃。綜上,本文要分析和解決的問題是,通過對(duì)人身侵權(quán)債權(quán)的界定以及與其他債權(quán)的比較來探討和解決如何界定人身侵權(quán)債權(quán)優(yōu)先權(quán)的問題,以期在破產(chǎn)清償中正確定位人身侵權(quán)債權(quán),以達(dá)到保護(hù)人身侵權(quán)債權(quán)人的目的。
[Abstract]:Under the insolvency law, the entry of an enterprise into insolvency proceedings means that it has lost its capacity to pay its debts due, or that the assets are not sufficient to pay off all the debts, or that they have become manifestly insolvent. Whether the creditor's debt can be paid depends on whether the creditor's debt has the priority of repayment and the effectiveness of the creditor's debt. Personal tort claims have been as the final settlement of ordinary claims, this order has not changed. But with the change of the times, the market economy is developing day by day, the gradual focus on humanistic care in the legislative process. In particular, the number of personal infringement cases gradually rose before the day, the bankruptcy law on the personal tort claims compensation order provisions are increasingly questioned by all parties. In personal infringement cases. At the same time, the creditor has to pay a high amount of medical expenses. Therefore, whether the creditor's debt can be paid is not only related to the life and health of the creditor. It also concerns the basic living security of creditors and their families, and even affects the stability of social order. Therefore, the author believes that there is a fundamental difference between personal tort claims and ordinary claims represented by contract claims. It is unreasonable to put the two in the same order of settlement. Therefore, in the increasing number of cases of personal infringement, especially in the mass tort cases, whether or not to give priority to the right of payment of personal tort creditors. The degree of priority given to it and how to balance its interests with secured creditors, labor creditors and countries is a difficult problem in the current legislation and practice of bankruptcy law. Case analysis and historical analysis of personal tort claims in bankruptcy settlement in the order of the problem. This article in addition to the introduction and conclusion is divided into four parts: the first part. This paper mainly studies the basic problems of bankruptcy liquidation sequence. Firstly, it determines the basic concept of bankruptcy liquidation order and its significance. Secondly, through the comparative study of the foreign bankruptcy law, the author points out that although few countries clearly stipulate that personal tort claims have priority in bankruptcy liquidation. However, it is the current legislative trend to give certain protection to personal tort creditor's rights. Finally, the author introduces the legislative development of bankruptcy liquidation in China. The second part. This paper introduces and analyzes the order of liquidation of the current personal tort creditor's rights in our country. Firstly, it introduces the concept and characteristics of personal tort creditor's rights under the background of bankruptcy law, and then introduces our country's stipulation on the order of personal tort creditor's rights settlement. Finally, the author points out the deficiency of the current personal tort creditor's right in our country. The third part is the theoretical analysis of the necessity of the priority of personal tort creditor's rights, starting with the legislative basis of bankruptcy priority. Combining with the necessity of priority payment of personal tort creditor's rights, and drawing lessons from the plan put forward by the American theoretical circle to solve this problem, in order to have some enlightenment to our country's bankruptcy liquidation order. 4th part. Through the comparative analysis of the personal tort creditor's right and the guarantee creditor's right, the bankruptcy expense and the common benefit debt, the labor creditor's right and the tax creditor's right, determine the specific settlement order of the personal tort creditor's right and the scope of each creditor's right to be repaid first. In summary, the problem to be analyzed and solved in this paper is. Through the definition of personal tort claims and the comparison with other claims to explore and solve how to define the priority of personal tort claims in order to correctly position personal tort claims in bankruptcy settlement. In order to achieve the purpose of protecting the obligee of personal infringement.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉林大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D922.291.92

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 管益杰;劉志強(qiáng);;淺析債權(quán)出資的法律程序[J];中共青島市委黨校.青島行政學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2009年08期

2 宋旭明;;論請(qǐng)求權(quán)與債權(quán)之關(guān)系混淆的歷史成因與理論對(duì)策[J];河北法學(xué);2010年05期

3 陳健松;股權(quán)性質(zhì)──新債權(quán)論[J];商業(yè)研究;2000年06期

4 潘勁松;;請(qǐng)求權(quán)與債權(quán)的法理比較分析[J];萍鄉(xiāng)高等�？茖W(xué)校學(xué)報(bào);2010年04期

5 溫世揚(yáng);武亦文;;物權(quán)債權(quán)區(qū)分理論的再證成[J];法學(xué)家;2010年06期

6 孫新強(qiáng);;破除債權(quán)平等原則的兩種立法例之辨析——兼論優(yōu)先權(quán)的性質(zhì)[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2009年06期

7 戴新毅;優(yōu)先取償權(quán)基本原理探析(上)——權(quán)利性質(zhì)論[J];寧夏大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(人文社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2003年06期

8 焦素霞;;控制企業(yè)對(duì)從屬企業(yè)的債權(quán)規(guī)則問題淺析[J];科技信息;2010年26期

9 李國祥;汪安亞;;關(guān)于銀行債權(quán)變股權(quán)的法律思考[J];法制與經(jīng)濟(jì);1998年03期

10 趙遠(yuǎn);;試析我國股權(quán)的性質(zhì)[J];河南省政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2009年03期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 吳蓬生;不良債權(quán)研究[D];中國政法大學(xué);2000年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前7條

1 向天馳;論債權(quán)平等性之突破[D];昆明理工大學(xué);2015年

2 于佳琪;人身侵權(quán)債權(quán)在破產(chǎn)清償中的順位研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2017年

3 單清峰;人身性債權(quán)優(yōu)先于財(cái)產(chǎn)性債權(quán)的法理分析[D];四川大學(xué);2004年

4 黃夏芳;破產(chǎn)債權(quán)審查確認(rèn)制度研究[D];蘇州大學(xué);2011年

5 徐中亮;債權(quán)股權(quán)化問題研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2004年

6 梁偉;一般債權(quán)質(zhì)押研究[D];安徽大學(xué);2012年

7 王東明;論存款的占有[D];吉林大學(xué);2013年

，

本文編號(hào)：1385967