本文選題：違約金酌減制度 + 合同自由�。� 參考：《華中師范大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：基于意思自治原則,我國《合同法》允許當(dāng)事人可以自由約定違約金。同時為了避免約定的違約金數(shù)額過高致使合同雙方利益嚴(yán)重失衡,法律也規(guī)定了違約金酌減制度。但我國有關(guān)違約金酌減制度的法律法規(guī)篇幅較少,內(nèi)容過于模糊,甚至不同的法規(guī)之間存在矛盾,致使違約金酌減制度在實際運行中出現(xiàn)了許多問題。對違約金酌減制度加以研究,有利于細(xì)化違約金酌減制度的一般規(guī)則,為司法審判提供法律和理論基礎(chǔ),統(tǒng)一裁量標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。本文分五個部分對違約金酌減制度進(jìn)行論述。第一部分主要是從違約金自身屬性及維護(hù)合同正義兩個方面論述了違約金酌減制度的理論依據(jù)。其中,重點澄清了違約金酌減實際上是對合同自由原則的修正,并未違背合同自由原則,為違約金酌減提供了堅定的理論基礎(chǔ)。第二部分論述了違約金酌減制度的適用前提、適用范圍和適用原則。首先我們討論了違約金酌減制度的適用前提,指出違約金酌減以違約方提出申請和違約金條款生效為前提條件。接著通過對適用范圍的3種學(xué)說進(jìn)行辯證分析,得出違約金酌減制度既適用于賠償性違約金又適用于懲罰性違約金。最后指出法院或仲裁機(jī)構(gòu)在審理違約金酌減案件時應(yīng)遵循謹(jǐn)慎適用原則和尊重當(dāng)事人意愿原則。第三部分討論了違約金酌減請求權(quán)的行使規(guī)則。本部分運用了反證法和辯證分析法對違約金酌減請求權(quán)的行使主體、行使方式和行使時間進(jìn)行了詳細(xì)的闡述,得出結(jié)論——違約金酌減請求權(quán)的主體僅限于當(dāng)事人,且違約方只能通過反訴或反請求的方式行使違約金酌減請求權(quán);在權(quán)利行使時間上,違約方在一審中未作出違約金酌減申請且未經(jīng)法官釋明的,違約金酌減請求權(quán)的行使時間可以延續(xù)至二審。第四部分闡述了違約金酌減制度的考量因素。重點包括三個方面:其一,違約造成的損失包括實際損失和可得利益損失;其二,違約方的過錯程度影響違約金的酌減幅度,違約方“惡意違約”,即違約方故意違約,違約金亦有酌減的可能性;其三,違約金的類型、訂立合同的形式不同,判斷違約金是否過高的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)亦不同,懲罰性違約金以債務(wù)為判斷視角,賠償性違約金以債權(quán)人為判斷視角。第五部分探討了我國違約金酌減制度的完善。通過分析我國違約金酌減制度在實際運行中出現(xiàn)的問題,即規(guī)則模糊且混亂,缺乏統(tǒng)一的裁判尺度,進(jìn)而提出完善建議。其一,從正面細(xì)化違約金酌減制度的一般規(guī)則。即明確規(guī)定法官釋明權(quán),明確規(guī)定違約金以不酌減為原則的指導(dǎo)思想,細(xì)化違約金過高的判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。其二,從反面列舉違約金酌減的限制及排除適用情形。具體來說,格式條款中針對提供方的違約金不得減少,已經(jīng)支付的違約金不得減少,惡意違約少減。本文研究的違約金酌減制度專指對約定違約金數(shù)額的調(diào)減,不包括對法定違約金的調(diào)整,亦不包括對約定賠償額計算方法的約定違約金情形的調(diào)整。本文的創(chuàng)新之處在于,在結(jié)構(gòu)上并未采取程序問題和實體問題兩分法的構(gòu)造,在完善建議上采取“兩路并進(jìn)”的立法思路,即正面細(xì)化規(guī)則、反面列舉例外情形。
[Abstract]:Based on the principle of autonomy, China's "contract law" allows the parties to have a free agreement on the breach of contract. At the same time, in order to avoid the excessive amount of the contracted liquidated damages, the law also stipulates the system of defaulting on the breach of contract. There are contradictions between different laws and regulations, resulting in many problems in the actual operation of the system of default gold reduction. Study on the system of defaulting gold discretionary reduction is beneficial to refine the general rules of the system of defaulting gold, provide the legal and theoretical basis for judicial trial and unify the standard of discretion. This article is divided into five parts of the system of defaulting on gold. The first part mainly discusses the theoretical basis of the system of defaulting gold from the two aspects of its own property and the justice of the contract, which clarifies that the discretionary reduction of the breach gold is actually an amendment to the principle of the freedom of contract, and does not violate the principle of freedom of contract, and provides a firm theoretical basis for the reduction of the breach gold. The second part discusses the applicable premise, the scope of application and the application principle of the system of the defaulting gold discretionary reduction. Firstly, we discuss the applicable premise of the system of the defaulting gold discretionary reduction, and point out that the default gold should be reduced by the default party's application and the entry into force of the default gold bar, and then through the dialectical analysis of the 3 theories of the scope of application, we can draw a conclusion. The system is applicable to both the compensation and the punitive damages. Finally, it is pointed out that the court or arbitration institution should follow the principle of prudent application and the principle of respect for the wishes of the parties. The third part discusses the rules of the action of the discretionary claim for breach of contract gold. The method of evidence analysis expounds the exercise subject, the way of exercise and the time of exercise of the right of defaulting on the default gold, and draws a conclusion that the main body of the claim is only limited to the parties, and the default party can only exercise the right of defaulting on the discretionary gold by counterclaim or counterclaim; in the time of exercising the rights, the breach of contract Fang Zaiyi is a breach of contract. In the fourth part, the fourth part expounds the consideration factors of the system of defaulting gold, including three aspects: first, the losses caused by default include the actual loss and the benefit loss; secondly, the fault of the default party's fault. The extent that the extent affects the discretion of the breach of contract, the default party "malicious breach", that is, the default party is intentional breach of contract, the default gold also has the possibility of discretionary reduction; thirdly, the type of the breach of contract, the form of the contract is different, the standard of judging whether the breach is too high is different, the punitive breach of contract is the angle of judgment with the debt as the judgment, and the indemnified breach of contract gold is the creditor In order to judge the angle of view. The fifth part discusses the perfection of the discretionary system of default gold in China. Through the analysis of the problems arising in the actual operation of the system of defaulting gold in our country, that is, the rules are vague and confused, the unified judgment is lacking, and then the suggestions are put forward. The judge's interpretation right is clearly defined as the guiding ideology of the breach of contract as a guiding principle, and refine the judgment standard of excessive breach of contract. Secondly, enumerate the limitations and exclusions of the default gold from the reverse side. Specifically, the breach of contract against the provider in the form clause shall not be reduced, the default damages already paid shall not be reduced, and the malevolent default is less. The system of default gold reduction in this paper refers to the reduction of the amount of the prescribed liquidated damages, not including the adjustment of the legal breach of contract, nor the adjustment of the contractual penalty in the calculation of the agreed compensation amount. The innovation of this paper is that the structure of the dual method of process order and entity problem is not adopted in the structure, and it is finished. Good advice is to adopt the legislative idea of "two way in progress", that is, to refine rules carefully and to list exceptions on the contrary.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：華中師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D923.6

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 孟勤國;申蕾;;論約定違約金調(diào)整的正當(dāng)性與限度[J];江漢論壇;2016年07期

2 譚啟平;張海鵬;;違約金調(diào)減權(quán)及其行使與證明[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2016年03期

3 羅昆;;我國違約金司法酌減的限制與排除[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法大學(xué)學(xué)報);2016年02期

4 姚明斌;;法定違約金制度新觀察[J];私法研究;2015年02期

5 羅昆;;違約金的性質(zhì)反思與類型重構(gòu)——一種功能主義的視角[J];法商研究;2015年05期

6 王洪亮;;違約金酌減規(guī)則論[J];法學(xué)家;2015年03期

7 韓強;;違約金擔(dān)保功能的異化與回歸——以對違約金類型的考察為中心[J];法學(xué)研究;2015年03期

8 陸青;;債法總則的功能演變——從共同規(guī)范到體系整合[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2014年04期

9 王洪亮;;違約金功能定位的反思[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法大學(xué)學(xué)報);2014年02期

10 姚明斌;;違約金司法酌減的規(guī)范構(gòu)成[J];法學(xué);2014年01期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前4條

1 柳婷婷;違約金酌減問題研究[D];北京理工大學(xué);2016年

2 張新進(jìn);論約定違約金過高的調(diào)整[D];吉林大學(xué);2015年

3 張海鵬;違約金調(diào)減制度研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2013年

4 葉吟丹;論違約金數(shù)額的調(diào)整[D];華東政法大學(xué);2011年

，

本文編號：1833266