欠缺批准或登记要件时合同的效力

发布时间：2018-01-29 19:48

本文关键词： 未生效合同合同效力行政审批　出处：《吉林大学》2012年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：缺少特别生效要件时合同的效力问题早有学者进行研究。近年来，随着2009年《最高人民法院关于适用中华人民共和国合同法若干问题的解释（二）》的颁布，做为未生效合同的重要类型，欠缺批准、登记合同的效力问题更成为近年我国合同法理论界研究的一个重点。本文试图从实证角度入手，通过对实践中法院判决的研究，结合当前此问题的理论研究成果，对此问题提出自己的看法。第一部分是问题与研究方法。第二部分是对笔者收集到的现有裁判的梳理。发现判决中存在的问题：纠纷的产生往往并不是当事人发现因合同欠缺批准、登记要件未生效，单纯的想或不想促成合同生效所引发，而是当事人因为其它方面的原因产生纠纷。值得注意的是，这时的合同往往已经进入到履行阶段。双方或者一方已经按约定为或者不为一定行为，或者一方按约定当为一定行为而不为从而给对方造成了损失，因此才引发诉讼。这样利益上的纠纷，在每个人均想达成本身利益最大化的情况下就需要一套如解决合同生效后的违约责任，或者合同未成立之前的缔约过失责任这样统一、系统的解决当事人利益纷争的规则体系来加以解决。第三部分是对已有的理论进行梳理、介绍。主要有缔约过失责任说、有效说、效力过失责任说、合同拘束力说。其中，缔约过失责任说的代表观点：由于须批准、登记合同并未生效，所以难以将之认定为以合同有效为前提的违约责任。根据缔约过失责任依据诚实信用原则的产生，包括合同成立以后，被认定无效或被撤销时（此时须审批、登记合同就被囊括其中）。基于对缔约过失责任诚实信用原则的违反，对合同无效负有过错的一方应当承担缔约过失责任。有效说的代表观点首先认为申请批准是约定义务而不是法定义务。约定义务约束力来源，应是有效的合同。只有这样当事方才有权请求负有申请批准、登记一方进行审批申请。其次，我国立法并未明确规定“未生效作为合同效力类型之一”。再次，法释[2009]5号对“损失”规定并不明确。实践不好操作、难以统一，不如违约责任成熟、系统。第三，法释[2009]5号第八条与《合同法》第五十八条表述语言基本一致，难免会使法院产生“未生效合同等于无效合同”的做法。第五，当合同效力的确定结果（无效或者有效）取决于行政机关的批准和登记时，“往往诱发当事人的机会主义行为”1。效力过失责任说认为：首先，该说认为须批准、登记合同责任不是缔约过失责任。第一，该说认为我国缔约过失责任发生时间限于合同订立阶段。与须批准、登记合同已成立未生效时间不符。第二，须批准、登记合同中有关由谁报请行政机关批准、登记义务人的约定，在合同未生效前就已经发生了效力。并且，缔约过失责任为法定责任，用来确定当事人约定的报请行政机关批准、登记义务所产生的责任不合逻辑。因为，作为法定责任的缔约过失责任，依据也应是法律规定。合同拘束说认为，合同的拘束力与合同效力是不同的两个概念。合同拘束力，特指合同于成立之后，任何一方当事人不得任意撤销。不同于合同效力，合同拘束力并不干预合同的履行。所以，当事人在须批准、登记合同之下所应承担的责任，并不是违约责任。因为违约责任的产生，要以合同生效为前提。故而成立缔约过失责任。从这个意义上，可以将之归于缔约过失责任说。第四部分是对缔约过失责任说的批判。缔约过失责任说解决了当事人有关报批义务人的责任问题。但是在面对须批准、登记合同纠纷中的其他问题时，缔约过失责任说往往显得力不从心。2对当事人“信赖利益”的赔偿也难以真正填补当事人基于对合同将来会生效预估而从事的履行行为被认定无效后带来的损失，难以解决当事人利益的划分。仅仅因为报批义务具有由法院认定而不是当事人通过合同进行约定的可能性，就将缔约过失责任说整体运用于须批准、登记合同纠纷处理中来。势必因为其解决不了其它问题，而陷入到“未生效=无效”模式。这样既不符合法律发展的潮流3，在纠纷解决和利益划分上也并不经济，还可能给权力寻租4提供机会。第五部分是有效说的证立。通过对合同成立、生效与合同效力制度的再讨论、特别生效要件与合同效力关系考量、审批设置目的与合同效力关系考量、审判过程的推演等方面进行分析整理，得出结论：将欠缺批准、登记要件合同认定为未生效合同，并不符合“意思自治”的合同法价值观念。给司法实践也带来了诸多的困扰与不便。在解释论无法做出合理解释，并且与行政审批设置目的并不冲突的前提下，将须批准、登记合同效力与行政审批相分离，以行政审批只控制合同的履行行为的立法论是合乎我国现实的合理选择。
[Abstract]:In recent years , with the enactment of the Supreme People ' s Court of 2009 on several issues concerning the application of the law of the People ' s Republic of China on the application of the contract law of the People ' s Republic of China , the issue of the validity of the contract is becoming more and more important in the theoretical circle of contract law in China in recent years . The first part is the question and the research method . The second part is the card of the existing judgment collected by the author . It is found that the problems in the judgment are that the generation of the dispute is not due to the lack of approval of the contract , the registration requirement does not enter into force , simply wants or does not want to lead to the contract entry into force , but the party disputes the reason for other reasons . It is worth noting that the parties or the party have already entered into the performance stage . The third part is to comb and introduce the existing theory . It is concluded that the contract is not effective because it is subject to approval and the contract is not effective , so it is difficult to find it as the liability for breach of contract on the premise of validity of contract . According to the principle of good faith according to the liability of fault liability , including the establishment of the contract , when the contract is deemed invalid or revoked ( at this time , the contract shall be approved and the registration contract is included ) . It is not clear that the contract has not entered into force . In the third part , it is not clear that the contract is not effective . The fourth part is the criticism of the liability of contracting fault liability . In the face of other problems in the contract dispute , it is difficult to solve the problem of the liability of the parties concerned . However , in the face of other problems in the contract dispute , it is difficult to solve the problem of the party ' s interests . The fifth part is the validity of the validity of the contract . Through the analysis and arrangement of the relationship between the effective element and the contract effect , the relation between the validity of the contract and the validity of the contract , the deduction of the trial process and so on , it is concluded that the contract of approval and registration is regarded as the non - effective contract and does not conform to the contract law value idea of " meaning autonomy " .

【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D923.6

【参考文献】