情势变更原则的本土化适用研究

发布时间：2018-04-24 11:43

本文选题：情势变更 + 本土化　；参考：《华东政法大学》2013年硕士论文

【摘要】：自20世纪以来，经过大陆法系和英美法系学者的反复梳理和讨论，情势变更原则已经完成了必要的知识准备，形成了各自法律体系之下的理论和适用共识。然而在中国，虽然从理论上看，对情势变更原则的学理界定是科学和明确的。但在实践中，它的内容和边界却又显得十分朦胧和模糊。不可否认，现阶段对情势变更原则的研究仍处于理论分析阶段，尚缺乏社会生活以及实务操作经验作为基础材料的支撑，致使司法实务中情势变更原则的适用被笼罩在一团迷雾之中，让人感到无以名状的困惑。鉴于此，有必要对情势变更制度在理论和适用衔接过程中的若干问题进行深入研讨，以期对该制度的本土化构建有所助益。情势变更原则的历史变迁告诉我们，对情势变更原则研究的核心不在于对其源起、含义、构成要件的探讨或说明，也不在于将其与周边法律概念的区别和联系进行理论澄清，而在于领会民法诚实信用原则以及公平原则在合同法领域是如何体现合同实质公平的。因此，需要进一步对其进行探寻的，正是发现合同实质公平的方法。目前，虽然有部分学者初步认识到这一点，，但他们在对情势变更司法适用进路进行设计的过程中都遇到了难以回避的问题。实际上，学者们在研究情势变更原则的过程中并没有真正深刻认识到，情势变更原则所追求的是实质理性，这与民法基本条文所追求的形式理性是背道而驰的，寄希望于使用严格的民法逻辑概念和框架对其进行解释必定是徒劳的。案件是否适用情势变更原则只能在个案中依赖法官的自由裁量，而不能适用概念法学的方法将其纳入到传统民法学的逻辑体系之中。鉴于此，文章提出了全新的情势变更原则司法适用方法。文章认为，情势变更原则司法适用研究的总体进路应当是：对“情势变更事件→情势变更原则适用”这一动态过程进行体系化思考，并将每一步所要参考的因素进行总结提炼。这样不仅可以实现情势变更原则与周边概念的合理区分，同时也能使法官在司法实践中做到正确的理解与适用。在此基础上，文章通过对《合同法司法解释（二）》第26条的研究与实践评析，将情势变更与周边概念在实务中的区分进一步作出了判断，并对情势变更条款适用所要遵守的程序问题进行了论述。最后，文章以楼市调控政策引发的房屋买卖合同纠纷是否可以适用以及如何适用情势变更原则为例，对上文提出的情势变更原则体系化适用理论进行了实例证成。
[Abstract]:Since the 20th century, after repeated combing and discussion among scholars of civil law system and common law system, the principle of situation change has completed the necessary knowledge preparation and formed the theory and application consensus under their respective legal systems. However, in China, although the theoretical definition of the principle of change of circumstances is scientific and clear. But in practice, its content and boundary appear very hazy and fuzzy. There is no denying that the research on the principle of situation change is still in the stage of theoretical analysis at the present stage and lacks the support of social life and practical operation experience as the basic materials. As a result, the application of the principle of situation change in judicial practice is shrouded in a fog, which makes people feel confused. In view of this, it is necessary to study in depth some problems in the course of theoretical and applicable cohesion of the regime of change of circumstances, in order to be helpful to the localization of the system. The historical change of the principle of change of circumstances tells us that the core of the study of the principle of change of circumstances is not the discussion or explanation of its origin, meaning, constitutive elements, nor the theoretical clarification of the difference and connection between it and the surrounding legal concepts. It lies in understanding the principle of good faith in civil law and how the principle of fairness in the field of contract law embodies the substantive fairness of contract. Therefore, it needs to be further explored, it is to find the substantive fairness of the contract method. At present, although some scholars have realized this point, they have encountered some unavoidable problems in the process of designing the path of judicial application of situational change. In fact, in the course of studying the principle of change of circumstances, scholars do not really realize that the principle of change of circumstances pursues substantial rationality, which runs counter to the formal rationality pursued by the basic provisions of civil law. It is futile to hope that the strict concept and framework of civil law logic can be used to explain it. Whether the principle of change of circumstances is applicable in a case can only depend on the discretion of the judge in a case, but it cannot be brought into the logic system of traditional civil law by applying the method of conceptual jurisprudence. In view of this, the article proposed a new principle of judicial application of the principle of change of circumstances. This paper holds that the overall approach to the study of the judicial application of the principle of circumstance change should be: to systematize the dynamic process of the application of the principle of change of circumstances to the principle of change of circumstances, and to sum up and refine the factors to be referred to in each step. In this way, it can not only realize the reasonable distinction between the principle of change of circumstances and the surrounding concepts, but also make the judge understand and apply correctly in judicial practice. On this basis, the article makes a further judgment on the distinction between the change of circumstances and the surrounding concepts in practice by analyzing the research and practice of Article 26 of the Judicial interpretation of contract Law (2). It also discusses the procedure to be observed in the application of the change of circumstances clause. Finally, taking whether and how to apply the principle of situation change caused by the property market regulation and control policy, the paper gives an example to prove the theory of systematization of the principle of change of circumstances.
【学位授予单位】：华东政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：D923

【参考文献】