论以物抵债调解协议的法律效力

发布时间：2018-02-27 14:07

本文关键词： 以物抵债以物抵债调解协议法律效力代物清偿　出处：《西南政法大学》2012年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：以物抵债调解协议是指，在民商事纠纷案件审理过程中，双方当事人经调解自愿达成以他种给付替代原定给付的协议。目前我国法律并未明确规定以物抵债调解协议的法律效力，学理界对以物抵债调解协议法律效力的研究亦甚少。因此，在司法实践中存在着以物抵债调解协议合法与否之争。以物抵债调解协议法律效力认定问题给司法实践带来了一定的困扰。本文在此基础上围绕以物抵债调解协议法律效力问题进行全面的剖析。本文分为六部分：第一部分：以两个案例的对比研究引出对本文论题的思考：以物抵债调解协议是否具有法律效力？这两个案例充分展现了对于以物抵债调解协议法律效力问题在司法实践中存在着两种截然不同的观点。第二部分：阐述以物抵债、以物抵债调解协议的含义，结合实践中的以物抵债现象，，将以物抵债分为代物清偿与债的更改两种。同时，通过对以物抵债调解协议与流质契约、让与担保的比较以及对以物抵债调解协议的性质与构成要件的分析，厘清概念，为论述以物抵债调解协议的法律效力作铺垫。第三部分：分析在以物抵债调解协议合法与否问题上我国现今学理与实务中存在的两种不同观点及其理由。从否定以物抵债调解协议法律效力的理由来看，主要是关于承认以物抵债调解协议的法律效力可能会产生一定的弊端。然而，这些弊端不是必然会产生的，而且这些弊端是可以通过一定的措施予以消除的，我们不能因其可能产生弊端而对其全盘否定。第四部分：分别从以物抵债调解协议自身定性角度、立法及案例角度、司法现状角度、当事人权利角度对以物抵债调解协议的法律效力进行分析，继而得出结论：只要以物抵债调解协议没有违反法律、行政法规的强制性规定，没有侵害国家及集体利益、社会公共利益，没有侵害案外人利益，没有违背当事人的真实意思，就应当承认其法律效力。第五部分：提出对消除以物抵债调解协议消极影响的构思：提醒双方当事人充分考量标的物价值；对双方当事人达成的以物抵债调解协议进行严格审查；规范以物抵债调解协议的实现方式；畅通事后救济途径，避免消极影响进一步扩大。第六部分：建议立法对以物抵债予以明确规定，可将以物抵债作为合同权利义务终止的情形之一明确规定于我国《合同法》第91条中，同时通过最高人民法院的司法解释对以物抵债进行详细的规定，统一以物抵债的含义，明确其构成要件及法律效力的认定标准，细化以物抵债的具体操作规程。继而为以物抵债调解协议的法律效力认定提供法律依据及规范指引。
[Abstract]:An agreement to settle debts in rem means that, in the course of adjudicating civil and commercial disputes, After mediation, the parties voluntarily reached an agreement to replace the original payment with another kind of payment. At present, the law of our country does not clearly specify the legal effect of the agreement to settle debts in rem. There is also little research on the legal effect of debt-for-rem mediation agreements in the academic community. In the judicial practice, there is a dispute about whether the mediation agreement is legal or not. The legal validity of the agreement is troubled to the judicial practice. On this basis, this article revolves around the mediation association of debt in rem. A comprehensive analysis of the legal effect. This paper is divided into six parts:. The first part: with two cases of comparative study leads to the thinking of the topic of this paper: whether the debt in rem mediation agreement has legal effect? These two cases fully show that there are two different views on the legal effect of debt mediation agreement in rem. The second part: expound the meaning of the mediation agreement between recompense and debt in rem, and combine the phenomenon of recompense in practice, divide the debt in rem into two kinds: recompense and modification. At the same time, through the mediation agreement and liquid contract, The comparison of the transfer guarantee and the analysis of the nature and the constitutive elements of the agreement on debt in rem should clarify the concept and pave the way for the discussion of the legal effect of the mediation agreement in rem. The third part analyzes two different viewpoints and their reasons in the theory and practice of the mediation agreement in rem, which is based on the reason of negating the legal effect of the mediation agreement in rem. It is mainly about the recognition that the legal effect of an agreement on debt-for-rem mediation may have certain drawbacks. However, these shortcomings are not inevitable, and they can be eliminated by certain measures. We cannot deny it all because of its possible drawbacks. Part 4th: from the qualitative angle of the mediation agreement in rem, the angle of legislation and case, the angle of judicial status, the angle of the parties' rights, the analysis of the legal effect of the mediation agreement in rem. Then the conclusion is drawn: as long as the mediation agreement in rem does not violate the compulsory provisions of the law and administrative regulations, it does not infringe upon the national and collective interests, the public interest, the interests of outsiders in the case, and does not violate the true intention of the parties. Its legal effect should be recognized. Part 5th: put forward the idea of eliminating the negative effect of the debt in rem mediation agreement: remind the parties to consider the value of the subject matter fully; Standardize the realization of debt-for-rem mediation agreement, unblock the way of ex post relief, and avoid further expansion of negative influence. Part 6th: it is suggested that the legislation should explicitly provide for the payment of debts in rem, and that one of the circumstances in which the contractual rights and obligations are terminated can be clearly stipulated in Article 91 of the contract Law of China. At the same time, through the judicial interpretation of the Supreme people's Court, it makes detailed provisions on redeem-for-debt, unifies the meaning of redeem-for-debt, clarifies its constituent elements and the standard of determining its legal effect. Then it provides the legal basis and normative guidance for the legal validity determination of the debt in rem mediation agreement.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D923

【参考文献】