论情事变更制度法律效果之构造模式

发布时间：2018-03-07 22:00

本文选题：再交涉义务模式　切入点：二次效力模式　出处：《山东大学》2017年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：情事变更制度的本质是因客观情事变化造成的损失,通过合同的变更或解除在双方当事人之间进行合理的分配。根据变更与解除的适用程序,情事变更法律效果的构造模式包括再交涉义务模式、二次效力模式以及或变更或解除模式。在再交涉义务模式中,再交涉义务作为实现合同变更或解除的途径之一,主要目的是保障合同当事人通过交涉达成变更合同的合意。再交涉义务是由德国学者N·Horn于上个世纪80年代提出的,一经提出受到学界的广泛关注,在《国际商事合同通则》以及《欧洲合同法原则》中已经对其进行了成文化的表述。二次效力模式主张合同的变更和解除的发生是有先后之分的,在第一次效力不能解决因情事变更导致的不公平结果时,才发生第二次效力。这种模式通过赋予一方当事人变更权或解除权以单方意思表示即可,有悖于合同"合意"原则。目前我国最高人民法院通过的司法解释,确立了我国情事变更制度的或变更或解除模式。这种模式强调当事人因情事变更遭受不利益的,有权请求法院变更或解除合同。在充分认识我国司法现实的基础上,最高人民法院发布的通知以及指导意见,在一定程度上保障了情事变更制度的适用。本文除引言与结语之外,共分为四章,结构如下:第一章主要论述了再交涉义务模式,从再交涉义务的一般理论入手,分析再交涉义务的性质、法律地位以及法律效果。针对再交涉义务的不足进行了分析。第二章主要论述了二次效力模式,从二次效力说的产生到二次效力的结构构成,并且就二次效力模式存在的缺陷进行分析。第三章主要论述了或变更或解除模式,从法官自由裁量权到最高人民法院出台的针对情事变更案件审理的程序规定,或变更或解除模式在适应我国司法实践过程中出现的种种不良反应。第四章主要是在总结前三章的基础上,对再交涉义务在我国实施的必要性和可行性进行分析,与我国现行的或变更或解除模式的比较分析,着重探讨了协商程序与再交涉义务的联系与区别,研究了在协商程序上引入再交涉义务的可行性。在此基础上对我国情事变更制度的完善提出的几点建议。
[Abstract]:The essence of the situation change system is the loss caused by the change of the objective situation, and the reasonable distribution between the parties shall be carried out through the change or rescission of the contract. The construction mode of legal effect of circumstance change includes renegotiation obligation model, secondary effect model and renegotiation or rescheduling mode. In renegotiation obligation model, renegotiation obligation is one of the ways to realize contract alteration or rescission. The main purpose is to ensure that the parties to the contract agree to change the contract through negotiation. The obligation of renegotiation was put forward by the German scholar N. Horn on -20s. In the General principles of International Commercial contracts and the principles of European contract Law, it has been culturally stated. The second effect occurs only when the first effect cannot resolve the unfair result caused by the change of circumstances. This mode can be expressed as unilateral intention by giving a party the right to change or rescind, Contrary to the principle of "agreement" of the contract. At present, the judicial interpretation adopted by the Supreme people's Court of our country has established the mode of alteration or dissolution of the situation in our country. The right to request the court to alter or rescind the contract. On the basis of a full understanding of the judicial reality of our country, the Supreme people's Court shall issue a notice and a guiding opinion, In addition to the introduction and conclusion, this paper is divided into four chapters, the structure of which is as follows: the first chapter mainly discusses the model of renegotiation obligation, starting with the general theory of renegotiation obligation. This paper analyzes the nature, legal status and legal effect of the renegotiation obligation, and analyzes the deficiency of the renegotiation obligation. The second chapter mainly discusses the model of the secondary effect, from the emergence of the secondary effect to the structure of the secondary effect. The third chapter mainly discusses the mode of change or rescission, from the discretion of the judge to the procedural provisions of the Supreme people's Court. The 4th chapter mainly analyzes the necessity and feasibility of implementing the renegotiation obligation in our country on the basis of summarizing the first three chapters. Comparing with the current or changing or rescinding mode in China, the paper emphatically discusses the relation and difference between the negotiation procedure and the obligation of renegotiation. This paper studies the feasibility of introducing the renegotiation obligation into the negotiation procedure, and puts forward some suggestions on the perfection of the situation change system in our country on this basis.
【学位授予单位】：山东大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D923.6

【相似文献】