论物业服务企业的给付义务及其与第三人侵权之关系——陈书豪与南京武宁房地产开发有限公司、南京青和物业管理有限公司财产损害赔

发布时间：2018-03-29 07:49

本文选题：物业服务　切入点：给付　出处：《苏州大学学报(法学版)》2015年04期

【摘要】：物业服务合同中,在认定物业服务企业的债务内容时,应当根据缔约的背景环境,综合合同约定、交易习惯等诸多因素对当事人意思进行解释,进行具体化地判定,而非完全取决于合同性质的认定。物业服务企业应负的安全保障义务,既有法定依据也得到理论与实践的支持。物业服务企业的合同债务是方式之债,应重点考察其服务本身和履行过程来判定是否存在服务瑕疵。若该违约中介入了第三人的侵权行为,则应采"合同构成"之合同拘束力理论框架作为分析工具,考察"防止第三人侵权"是否落入债务人自愿承接的债务内容中,以决定债务人可否免责,方能尊重当事人意思自治及其风险配置。物业服务企业对小区公用区域负有防范第三人侵害业主的安全保障义务,故不得免责。合同法第121条应当限缩适用。
[Abstract]:In the property service contract, when determining the debt content of the property service enterprise, we should explain the meaning of the party concerned according to the background environment of the contract, the comprehensive contract agreement, the transaction habit, and so on, and make a concrete judgment. It is not entirely dependent on the recognition of the nature of the contract. The security obligations of the property service enterprises are supported by both the legal basis and the theory and practice. The contractual debt of the property service enterprises is the debt of the way. The service itself and the performance process should be investigated to determine whether the service is defective or not. If the third party's tort is involved in the breach of contract, the contract binding force theoretical framework of "contract constitution" should be adopted as the analysis tool. To investigate whether "preventing infringement by a third party" falls into the content of the debtor's voluntary debt, so as to determine whether the debtor can be exempted from liability, The property service enterprise has the duty to guard against the third party against the owner, so it can not be exempted from liability. Article 121 of the contract law should be limited to apply.
【作者单位】：浙江大学光华法学院;
【分类号】：D923.6

【参考文献】