论法律选择中意思自治原则的限制

发布时间：2018-06-17 03:40

本文选题：法律选择 + 意思自治　；参考：《广东财经大学》2015年硕士论文

【摘要】：法律选择中的当事人意思自治原则从确立到发展至今,其业已成为国际私法层面最为重要和最具普遍意义的法律适用原则之一。从历史角度考察,该原则发轫于实体法上的私法自治,并成为了国际私法中意思自治原则最重要的表现形式。但该原则作为自由与限制的统一体,在适用范围日益扩大的同时,对其限制问题的研究也绝不能付之阙如。对于法律选择中意思自治予以限制,可以防止因对其滥用造成的“实质正义”的缺失,同时也体现了自由的相对性。另外,这种限制也满足了维护国家或社会公共利益的需要,并有利于实现法律资源合理配置的目的。在对法律选择中意思自治限制的分类上,文章主要将其分为内部限制和外部限制两大类。内部限制,主要是指在满足意思自治成立条件时所要求的特定构成要件而产生的限制。这种限制主要包括了对法律选择主体的限制、范围的限制以及法律选择时间和方式的限制。本文认为,法律选择中传统的善意选择与实质性联系的要求已不应构成对当事人意思自治的主要障碍。所谓外部限制,主要是指普遍意义上的冲突规范适用制度对当事人意思自治构成的限制。其主要包括国际私法中的识别制度构成的限制,以及公认的公共秩序保留和“直接适用的法”构成的限制。另外,文章还根据意思自治限制的最新发展趋势,详细论述了有关弱者保护对意思自治的限制,以及外国法查明制度在我国实际运用中对于当事人意思自治结果之限制。最后,在前述研究的基础上针对我国的相关立法和司法实践,认为我国对于当事人选法时间节点规定的略显靠后,这不利于诉讼效率的提高和当事人权益的保障。并且,我国在对选法方式的规定上也显的过于保守。因此,应将当事人选法的时间节点提前至一审开庭之前。而在选法方式上,立法也应承认默示的选法方式,并对其判断标准加以细化。另外,针对公共秩序保留和外国法查明制度的问题,既有立法规定的不细致和不完备的客观原因,亦有法官怠于查明外国法的“归乡情结”和滥用自由裁量权的主观原因。最后,对于“直接适用的法”的规定,也存在不够细致和完善的缺憾。对以上问题的解决,应当优化与细化立法,将权力装入制度之笼。以防止因立法的漏洞和自由裁量权的滥用造成对法律选择中当事人意思自治效果的不当减损。
[Abstract]:From the establishment to the development of the principle of party autonomy in the choice of law, it has become one of the most important and universal principles of legal application in private international law. From the historical point of view, the principle originated from the autonomy of private law in substantive law, and has become the most important manifestation of the principle of autonomy of will in private international law. However, as the unity of freedom and restriction, the study on the restriction of the principle can not be done without its application scope being expanded day by day. To restrict the autonomy of will in the choice of law can prevent the absence of "substantial justice" caused by its abuse, and at the same time embody the relativity of freedom. In addition, this restriction meets the needs of safeguarding the public interests of the state or society, and is conducive to the rational allocation of legal resources. In the classification of autonomy of will in the choice of law, the article divides it into two categories: internal restriction and external restriction. Internal restriction, mainly refers to the specific constituent elements required to meet the conditions for the establishment of autonomy of will. This kind of restriction mainly includes the limitation of the subject of choice of law, the limitation of scope and the limitation of time and mode of choice of law. This paper holds that the requirement of the traditional bona fide choice and substantial connection in the choice of law should not be the main obstacle to the autonomy of the parties. The so-called external restriction mainly refers to the limitation that the conflict norm application system constitutes to the autonomy of the party's will. It mainly includes the limitation of the identification system in private international law, as well as the recognized reservation of public order and the limitation of "directly applicable law". In addition, according to the latest development trend of the autonomy of will, this paper discusses in detail the limitation of the protection of the weak on the autonomy of the will and the restriction of the result of the autonomy of the party concerned in the practical application of the foreign law ascertainment system in our country. Finally, on the basis of the above research, the author thinks that the time node of the parties' choice of law in our country is slightly behind the time node, which is not conducive to the improvement of the efficiency of litigation and the protection of the rights and interests of the parties in the light of the relevant legislation and judicial practice of our country. Moreover, our country is too conservative in the regulation of the way of election. Therefore, the time node of the parties to select the law should be brought forward to the first trial session. In the way of selecting the law, the legislation should also recognize the implied way of selecting the law and refine its judgment standard. In addition, in view of the problems of public order reservation and foreign law ascertainment system, there are not only the imprecise and incomplete objective reasons stipulated by legislation, but also the subjective reasons why judges are lazy to find out the "homecoming complex" of foreign law and abuse of discretion. Finally, the provisions of the "directly applicable Law" also have the defects of detail and perfection. To solve the above problems, we should optimize and refine the legislation and put the power into the cage of the system. In order to prevent the legislative loopholes and the abuse of discretion caused by the choice of law party autonomy effect of improper impairment.
【学位授予单位】：广东财经大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D997

【参考文献】