论强制性规定对合同效力的影响

发布时间：2018-04-30 07:22

本文选题：效力性强制性规定 + 多层次效力体系　；参考：《吉林大学》2012年硕士论文

【摘要】：国家强制和私法自治似民法中的阴阳两极，此消彼涨却又共生共灭，无时不在调和之中，无时不在寻求一条和谐相处之道。合同无效和合同有效好似国家强制和私法自治在合同法中的缩影：此消彼长，共生共灭，每一次立法和司法解释都能看见它们剑拔弩张、张弛有道。从三大经济合同法到《民法通则》，，从《民法通则》到《合同法》，从《合同法》到《合同法解释（一）》和《合同法解释（二）》，合同违反强制性规定的的效力判定也经历了一个从违反法律规定即无效到违反强制性规定无效，又到违反效力性强制性规定才无效的判断过程，合同有效的范围在不断扩大，合同无效的范围在不断缩小，这无疑是我国私法的进步。但合同无效的背后是国家强制，是国家对社会公共利益和公共秩序的维护，如何调节私法自治和国家强制，如何在最大限度的维护公民的私法自由的同时又不失社会公共利益和公共秩序的维护，如何在合同违反强制性规定时合理的界定有效无效界限，其最终落脚点落实在了对效力性强制性规定的判断解释上。本文共分为五个部分：引言部分，主要讲述我国现阶段对效力性强制性规定认定上存在的困境，主要包括效力性强制性规定存在的法域和位阶不明，效力性强制性规定和管理性强制性规定界限不明，违反效力性强制性规定的合同效力判定单一化以及法官自由裁量权的缺失。正是这些因素的存在，导致效力性强制性规定判定不明，从而影响到合同的效力状态，使用不当更可能导致合同无效范围的扩大。第一章就如何判定效力性强制性规定进行逻辑分析，该部分主要分为两个层次：其一，明晰强制性规定存在的范围，即进行位阶限制，将强制性规定限制于法律和行政法规，将地方性法规和规章排除在外；其二，效力性强制性规定的判断标准，将强制性规定和非强制性规定相区别，将效力性强制性规定和管理性强制性规定相区别。第二章是合同违反强制性规定时的效力判断，即建立一个多层次的效力判定体系，违反效力性强制性规定并不一定就是无效，应根据效力性强制性规定的类别分别赋予无效、可变更可撤销、有效的效力判定。第三章是法官自由裁量权，即个案正义的矫正，通过比例原则的适用，一方面使法官可以进行自由裁量，一方面使其自由裁量受到一定限制，不至于造成自由裁量权的滥用，以维护法律的稳定性。第四章提出立法建议，应在《合同法》第52条第5项后面增加但书规定“但法律另有规定的除外”，其目的有二：其一，建立多层次的效力评价体系；其二，赋予法官自由裁量权。这不仅符合我国的立法模式，更符合我国的立法语言特点。本文重点在于对《合同法解释（二）》第14条中的效力性强制性规定如何进行判断提出一套完整的逻辑体系，使其判定清晰明了且具有司法实用性，在法律稳定性的基础上不失法官自由裁量权对个案的灵活处理，以维护个案正义。
[Abstract]:The state compulsory and private law autonomy resembles the Yin and Yang in the civil law, but this rises and rises in the same period.
The invalidity of the contract and the validity of the contract are like the epitome of the state compulsory and private law autonomy in the contract law.
From the three major economic contract laws to the general rules of the civil law, from the general rules of the civil law to the contract law, from the contract law to the contract law interpretation (one) and the contract law (two), the determination of the validity of the contract violates the mandatory provisions, and has also experienced a violation of the mandatory provisions from the violation of the law to the mandatory provisions, and the violation of the mandatory mandatory provisions. In the process of ineffective judgment, the scope of the validity of the contract is expanding constantly, the scope of the contract is narrowing, which is undoubtedly the progress of the private law of our country. But behind the null and void of the contract is the state coercion, the maintenance of the state's public interests and public order, how to regulate the private law autonomy and the state coercion, and how to maximize the maintenance. At the same time, the freedom of private law of the citizen does not lose the public interests and the maintenance of public order, how to define the effective null and void limit reasonably when the contract violates the mandatory provisions, and its final foothold is implemented in the interpretation of the judgment of the mandatory mandatory provisions.
This article is divided into five parts:
In the introduction part, it is mainly about the existing difficulties in the cognizance of the compulsory compulsory provisions in China at the present stage, mainly including the unidentified legal domain and rank of the mandatory mandatory provisions, the unidentified limits of the effective mandatory provisions and the administrative mandatory provisions, the simplification of the judgment of the validity of the contract and the judge's self. The absence of the right of discretion is the existence of these factors, which leads to the unidentified determination of the mandatory mandatory provisions and the effect of the validity of the contract, and the improper use of the contract may lead to the expansion of the scope of the contract invalid.
The first chapter is the logical analysis of how to determine the mandatory mandatory provisions, which is divided into two levels: first, to clarify the scope of the mandatory provisions, that is, to limit the position, to restrict the mandatory provisions to the laws and administrative regulations, to exclude the local regulations and regulations; secondly, to determine the validity of the mandatory provisions. To break the standard, distinguish between mandatory and non mandatory provisions, and distinguish between mandatory mandatory provisions and mandatory administrative regulations.
The second chapter is the validity judgment when the contract violates the mandatory provisions, that is to establish a multi-level evaluation system of effectiveness. The violation of the mandatory mandatory provisions is not necessarily invalid. It should be ineffective according to the categories of the mandatory mandatory provisions, and can be changed to revocable and effective determination of effectiveness.
The third chapter is the judge's discretion, that is, the correction of the case justice, the application of the principle of proportionality, on the one hand, the judge can make the discretion. On the one hand, the discretion is restricted to a certain extent, and it does not cause the abuse of the discretion, in order to maintain the stability of the law.
The fourth chapter puts forward legislative proposals, which should be added to the provisions of the "contract law" and the fifty-second fifth items "except for the other provisions of the law", the purpose of which is two: first, to establish a multi-level evaluation system of effectiveness; secondly, to grant the judge's discretion. This is not only in accordance with China's legislative model, but also in accordance with the characteristics of the legislative language of our country.
The focus of this article is to put forward a complete set of logical system on how to judge the effective mandatory provisions in the interpretation of the contract law (two) and fourteenth, to make it clear and with judicial practicality. On the basis of the stability of the law, it does not lose the discretion of the judge to handle the case, so as to maintain the case justice.

【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】