合同体系下的利息给付问题研究

发布时间：2018-05-13 10:02

本文选题：利息给付 + 不当得利　；参考：《西南财经大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：利息在整个国家经济生活中随处可见,但人们却很少反思,究竟利息是什么?法学学者们对于利息的讨论往往集中于利息给付性质的领域。然而,仅仅讨论利息给付义务的存在并不能解决实际中的利息给付问题。国内法学界对于利息问题缺乏全面系统的研究。在现有研究的缺乏下,伴随而生的是司法实践中涉及利息给付相关问题的思维混乱。从目前的司法案例来看,司法实践中法院的观点各异,缺乏统一的认识,同案不同判的现象时有发生。我国现行法下立法中并没有对利息给付进行一种定性。就合同体系下的利息给付,其究竟是作为一种不当得利返还的类型还是作为合同损害赔偿加以规制,现行立法以及法学理论都没有系统研究。我们急需通过加深对利息问题的理论认识,来解决这法律困境。鉴于国内对于利息给付问题系统研究较少,而且缺少对理论和司法实践二者关联互动的研究；而国外近年来对此研究颇丰,本文将以为对国外利息给付问题研究的介绍为起点,在前期研究基础上,通过对利息给付问题相关理论的介绍、以及对司法实践中不同情形下利息给付问题的研究,力求系统的梳理现行法下利息给付相关问题,通过法律解释的方法对现有制度进行完善本文拟通过对利息给付性质的探讨,借用的PECL, CISG, UPICC中对利息的相应研究成果,通过作为惯例的PECL, CISG, UPICC规则重构利息给付规则。本文拟分为以下四个部分：第一部分首先讨论利息给付相关理论问题,包括利息概念的概述以及PECL, CISG, UPICC中的利息相应规则及其对于中国司法实践的意义。文章的第二部分通过对具体司法案例的梳理,总结出司法实践中存在着将利息作为不当得利与损害赔偿两种意见,并进一步讨论二者处理的不同之处,作为不当得利在利率确定上,责任承担上与作为损害赔偿的利息具有不同之处。在此基础上,本文进一步论证,作为不当得利利息所具有的详细特征和作为损害赔偿的利息给付所具有的特征,最终总结利息的实质；第三部分阐释合同体系下的利息给付具体情形,讨论了在合同效力瑕疵以及金钱之债迟延履行情形下的利息给付问题。第四部分论述如何利用通过作为惯例的PECL, CISG, UPICC中对利息条款的相应条款对合同体系下的利息给付法律适用的帮助。在此基础上,我们将这个命题进一步展开。当事人若未明确约定以UPICC通则为合同准据法,而仅明示或默示的约定合同受一般法律原则(general principles of law)、国际法原则(principles of international law)、商人法(国际商事习惯法,lex mercatoria)的约束,法院或仲裁庭能否适用UPICC通则作为裁判或仲裁的法律依据?对于使国家法定裁判权的法院,对不适用本国合同法的具体条文而适用一个国际组织所出版的法律文件,应该如何进行论证?尤其面对法官应依法裁判的宪法要求,法院应如何正当化?要回答上述这个问题,本文将将其分为四个具体问题加以论证,其分别是合同法律渊源的特殊性；作为合同法律渊源的商事交易习惯,PECL, CISC,UPICC作为中国合同法中的商事交易习惯,在不违背国内现有强行法的前提下使用PECL, CISC,UPICC中的具体规则。
[Abstract]:Interest is seen everywhere in the whole country's economic life, but people seldom think about it. What is the interest on earth? The discussion of interest is often concentrated in the field of interest payment. However, only the existence of interest payment obligation can not solve the problem of interest payment. There is a lack of comprehensive and systematic research. In the absence of existing research, it is accompanied by the confusion of thinking related to interest payment in judicial practice. From the current judicial case, the views of the court in judicial practice are different, lack of a unified understanding, and the different cases of the same case occur. There is a qualitative analysis of interest payment. As to whether the interest payment under the contract system is a type of improper benefit return or as a contract damage compensation, the current legislation and the theory of law have not been systematically studied. We need to deepen the theoretical understanding of the interest problem to solve the legal dilemma.
In view of the lack of systematic research on the issue of interest payment in China, and the lack of research on the interrelated interaction between the two parties in theory and judicial practice, the research abroad has been very fruitful in recent years. This article will consider the introduction of the study of interest payment abroad as a starting point, on the basis of earlier research, and through the introduction of the related theories of interest payment. And the research on the issue of interest payment in different cases of judicial practice, striving to systematically comb the related issues of interest payment under the current law, and improve the existing system through the method of legal interpretation.
This paper is intended to reconstruct interest payment rules by means of PECL, CISG and UPICC, which are used as the usual PECL, CISG and UPICC rules. This article is divided into four parts: the first part is to discuss the theory of interest payment, including the overview of the concept of interest and the concept of interest. The corresponding rules of interest in PECL, CISG and UPICC and its significance to the judicial practice in China. The second part of the article, through the combing of specific judicial cases, summarizes two opinions on the existence of interest as unjust enrichment and damages in judicial practice, and further discusses the differences between the two parties as an unjust enrichment. On the basis of the rate determination, the responsibility is different from the interest as compensation for damages. On this basis, this paper further demonstrates that as the characteristic of the interest of unjust enrichment and the characteristics of interest payment as compensation for damages, the essence of interest is summed up, and the third part explains the interest payment under the contract system. In the fourth part, the fourth part discusses how to make use of the relevant provisions of the interest clause to the interest payment under the contract system by the customary PECL, CISG and UPICC. One step unfolds. If the parties are not clearly defined by the general law of the UPICC as the applicable law of the contract, and only the explicit or implied contract contracts are subject to the general legal principles (general principles of law), the principles of the international law (Principles of international law), the merchant law (International Commercial customary law, Lex Mercatoria), the court or the arbitral tribunal can apply the UPICC. The general rule is the legal basis for the referee or arbitration? How to apply the legal documents published by an international organization to the courts that make the state's legal jurisdiction, which is not applicable to the specific provisions of the national contract law? The problem, this article will be divided into four specific problems to be demonstrated, which are the particularity of the origin of the contract law; as the commercial transaction habit of the origin of the contract law, PECL, CISC, UPICC are used as commercial transaction habits in the contract law of China, and use the specific rules in PECL, CISC, and UPICC without violating the existing domestic force law.

【学位授予单位】：西南财经大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D923.6

【参考文献】