无偿性对赠与合同规则的影响

发布时间：2018-05-25 16:33

本文选题：无偿性 + 赠与合同　；参考：《西南财经大学》2012年博士论文

【摘要】：无偿性是赠与合同的本质特征,受无偿性的影响,赠与合同产生了许多与有偿合同不同的规则。在赠与合同中,由于双方没有对价交易,如果采用有偿合同的规则,显然会导致双方的利益失衡。在这种情况下,法律不得不以无偿性为基点,设计出与有偿合同不同的规则,但是,这些规则不管是在理论上,还是在司法实务中,颇受争议,其根源在于对无偿性的认识不同。为了正确理解无偿性的内涵,正确把握无偿性的作用,制定出公平合理的赠与规则,有必要探讨无偿性对赠与合同规则的影响。一、文章的主要内容第一章,“赠与合同无偿性的正当性论证”。无偿性是本文研究的逻辑起点,它的正当性,意在揭示人们为什么要把财产无偿赠与他人,回答无偿赠与为何会获得法律的保护,在界定无偿性的基础上,对其法理基础和效力根源进行分析,为后文的研究奠定理论基础。研究认为,无偿性的本质在于赠与人付出财产上的利益,受赠人获得财产上的利益。其正当性来源是：第一,人性基础。人是道德律的主体,人性在本质上是善良的和关心社会的,人生来就具有同情心,并且关怀他们的同类。当有人处于困境的时候,人们就会联想到如果自己遭遇同样处境时的心情和需要救助的渴望,人性中的同情、关切和仁爱就会自然突显出来,从而产生赠与的意志；第二,社会基础。人是一种社会动物,天性少不了合作和互助,帮助别人就等于帮助自己。每个单独的个体,在困难面前都是弱小的,只有联合起来,互惠互利,才能以集体的力量战胜未知的困难；第三,经济基础。赠与可以产生合作剩余,是一个公共产品,在每一个人有困难的时候,都会受益。无偿赠与获得法律保护的效力根源是：意思自治。人们的共同意志有创设法律的功能,同理,双方当事人的意志也有创设合同的功能,合同的正当性就来自于人们的意志本身,其创设的合同具有相当于法律的效力。因此,赠与人自愿把财产无偿赠与他人,其正当性就源于意思自治,理应获得法律的保护。无偿性赠与的存在,不仅是民法制度构造的需要,其本身也是每个人利益的需要。第二章,“无偿性对赠与合同成立规则的影响”。本章是全文的重点和难点之一,围绕赠与合同成立的相关理论,对其进行系统的梳理和评析。认为诺成性+任意撤销权的立法模式,不符合中国国情和人们的生活方式,也不能平衡合同双方的利益,应当回归无偿性的本性,采用实践性与诺成性的区分模式；在赠与合同的形式上,认为无偿性对当事人的权益影响很大,如果采用不要式,难以避免考虑不周和信口开河的情况出现,难以保证意思表达的真实性,因此应根据不同的赠与,区分要式和不要式的立法模式。对某些重要的赠与,有必要采用特定形式,以警示双方当事人要谨慎处分自己的财产权利,使赠与合同的规则设定更加合理。第三章,“无偿性对赠与合同生效规则的影响”。赠与合同是否发生法律效力,与主体和客体因素有关。受无偿性影响,赠与合同的主体和客体与有偿合同相比差异较大。在有偿合同中,双方当事人都必须具有完全民事行为能力。受无偿性的影响,在赠与合同中,受赠人可以是任何人,不受行为能力的限制,其理由在于受赠人是纯获利益,能否辨认自己的行为后果,都不会危及本人利益、他人利益和公共利益。赠与合同的客体受无偿性的影响,也与有偿合同的客体不完全一致,其范围要比有偿合同广泛得多。不管是有形财产,还是无形的财产,只要不违反法律规定,都可以作为赠与的客体。第四章,“无偿性对赠与合同‘失效’规则的影响”。一般情况下,有偿合同没有“失效”规则,合同一旦发生效力,就不可能再失去效力。然而,对于赠与合同,受无偿性的影响,准予发生效力的合同在一定条件下失去效力。因此,赠与合同产生了三个使合同失去效力的特有规则,即任意撤销权、法定撤销权和贫困抗辩权,目的就是弥补赠与人因无偿赠与他人财产而产生的利益不平衡状态。其中任意撤销权是本文的重点与难点,基于无偿性,适当优待赠与人无可厚非,但是,给予一个没有限制的任意撤销权,与权利本身相冲突。我们不能因赠与合同的无偿性,就准许赠与人随意“出尔反尔”突破民法的基本原则,这种以牺牲基本原则为代价的权利,违背了民法的基本精神,认为没有正当性,建议予以废除。法定撤销权和贫困抗辩权是维护赠与人利益不可缺少的权利。法定撤销权是对“忘恩负义”的受赠人进行惩罚,彰显赠与合同的道德本质。贫困抗辩权是对“助人为乐”的赠与人进行保护,解除赠与人的后顾之忧。第五章,“无偿性对赠与合同法律责任规则的影响”。赠与合同的无偿性,不但影响其权利义务的构造,还对双方的法律责任产生影响。为了平衡赠与人因赠与而受到的财产损失,在责任阶段采用的措施是减轻赠与人的法律责任,以达到鼓励赠与的目的。赠与人对一般过失不承担责任,仅对故意和重大过失承担责任；不对间接损失承担责任,仅对直接损失承担责任, 结论：对无偿性的影响力,作出了简要的检讨和完善建议。认为,我们不能无限夸大无偿性对赠与合同规则的影响力,只有辩证地看待无偿性的影响力,才可能实现双方的利益平衡,才能完善赠与合同制度。二、研究的创新之处及有待进一步探索的问题 (一)可能的创新之处 1、视角上有所突破以无偿性为视角,探索其对赠与合同规则的影响,与有偿合同相比,可能属于较新领域的研究,拓宽了合同规则的研究范围和视野,丰富了合同制度的内容。 2、对无偿性影响力的澄清过去,由于某种误解,我们夸大了无偿性对赠与合同规则的影响,认为赠与规则的设定,应当偏向赠与人,才能实现利益平衡。事实上,兼顾双方的利益,才有利于鼓励赠与,有利于实现法律效果和社会效果的统一。只有辩证地看待无偿性问题,才能较好地实现赠与的宗旨,减少赠与纠纷的发生。理性地看待无偿性的特点,对赠与规则加以改造和完善,才能更好地保障双方当事人的合法权益。 3、提出废除任意撤销权的建议受无偿性的影响,我国《合同法》设立了“诺而不成”的任意撤销权制度。认为这与我国国情不相符,在现实生活中产生的许多赠与纠纷,就是由于赠与人“依法”不遵守承诺造成的。任意撤销权的设立,无疑给那些无诚信的人,以合法的借口和理由,一方面诚恳地向他人许诺将赠与多少财产,一方面又在财产权利转移之前,行使合法的任意撤销权,导致合同被撤销,这样的赠与允诺和“戏言”没有本质区别。无偿性不是设立任意撤销权的理由,任意撤销权的设立,没有正当性依据：第一,它违背了诚实信用原则；第二,它违背了合同自由原则；第三,它违背了合同正义原则；且任意撤销权的配置失衡,消极作用突显。为此,提出了废除任意撤销权的建议。另外,法定撤销权与贫困抗辩权有其合理性,建议保留及完善。 4、提出双方利益平衡的新模式在建议废除任意撤销权的基础上,提出“区分”模式,这种模式更有利于平衡双方的利益,也更加符合我国国情和人们的生活方式。区分一：一般口头赠与合同、人身性财产的赠与合同为实践合同,具有公益性质或者道德性质的口头赠与合同、书面合同为诺成合同；区分二：以财产交付为权利变动的赠与合同、以公益或者道义为目的赠与合同为不要式合同,以财产登记为权利变动的赠与合同为要式合同。 (二)不足之处由于本人是一名司法实务工作者,理论水平有限,加上无偿性理论的复杂性,尽管竭尽全力,轻重缓急还是难以做到兼顾,逻辑驾驭仍然比较困难,难免顾此失彼,不合理的论述和不成熟之观点在所难免,再加之掌握的文献资料有限,在一定程度上影响了研究的质量和完整性。通过本次学习,深感自己的无知,以此告诫自己,今后更要努力学习! (三)有待进一步研究的问题赠与合同受无偿性的影响,对赠与人需作某些优待保护,这些优待的尺度如何把握?赠与损害如何救济?特种赠与如何认定?等等问题,都有待下一步的深入研究。
[Abstract]:Free sex is the essential feature of the gift contract. The grant contract produces many rules different from the paid contract under the influence of the gratuitous nature. In the gift contract, as the two parties do not deal with the price, the rules of the paid contract obviously lead to the balance of interests between the two parties. In this case, the law has to be based on gratuitous. The rules which are different from the paid contract are designed, but the rules, whether in theory or in the judicial practice, are quite controversial. The origin of these rules is the different understanding of the unpaid nature. In order to understand the connotation of compensation without compensation correctly, correctly grasp the function of the free sex and formulate a fair and reasonable gift rule, it is necessary to discuss the free sex to the gift. The influence of the contract rules.
First, the main contents of the article
The first chapter, "justification of the gratuitous nature of the gift contract". The gratuitous nature of this article is the logical starting point of this study. Its legitimacy is intended to reveal why people give property to others without compensation and answer why the free gift will be protected by the law. On the basis of defining the unpaid nature, it analyzes its legal basis and root cause. The latter study lays a theoretical foundation. The study holds that the essence of gratuitous nature lies in the benefit of the donor in the property, and the recipient gains the interests of the property. Its legitimacy is the first, the foundation of human nature, the human being the subject of the moral law, the nature of kindness and caring for the society, and the compassion and concern of life. They are of their kind. When people are in trouble, people think that if they are in the same mood and the desire to be rescued, the sympathy, concern and kindness in human nature will emerge naturally, thus generating the will of gift; second, the social foundation. Man is a social animal, and nature is not a cooperation and mutual assistance. To help others is to help themselves. Each individual is weak in the face of difficulties. Only together, mutual benefit and mutual benefit can overcome the unknown difficulties with the strength of the collective. Third, the economic basis. A gift can produce a cooperative surplus, which is a public product, and will benefit every person when it is difficult. Free gift. The root of the validity of the legal protection is autonomy. The common will of the people has the function of creating the law. In the same way, the will of the parties also has the function of creating the contract. The legitimacy of the contract comes from the will of the people itself and the contract created by the parties is equivalent to the legal effect. Therefore, the donor voluntarily makes the property free. The justification of the gift to others is derived from the autonomy of the meaning, and the protection of the law should be obtained. The existence of free gift is not only the need of the structure of the civil law system, but also the need of everyone's interests.
The second chapter, "the effect of gratuitous on the rules of the establishment of the gift contract". This chapter is one of the key and difficult points of the full text. This chapter systematically combs and evaluates the relevant theories of the gift contract. The legislative model of Nobel + arbitrarily revocation right does not conform to China's national conditions and people's life style, and does not balance the parties to the contract. The interests should return to the nature of free sex and adopt the pattern of distinction between practice and nature; in the form of a gift contract, it is considered that no compensation has a great influence on the rights and interests of the parties. If it is not used, it is difficult to avoid the occurrence of untimely consideration and opening up the river, so it is difficult to ensure the authenticity of the expression, so it should be based on the difference. For some important gifts, it is necessary to use specific forms to warn both parties to dispose of their property rights carefully and to make the rules of the grant contract more reasonable.
The third chapter, "the effect of gratuitous on the rules of the entry into force of the gift contract". The legal effect of the grant contract is related to the subject and the object factor. The subject and object of the grant contract are different from the paid contract under the influence of gratuitous. In the paid contract, both parties must have full civil capacity. In the gift contract, in the gift contract, the donee may be any person, not subject to the limitation of the capacity of the act. The reason is that the recipient is the pure benefit, and whether the person can recognize the consequences of his own behavior will not jeopardize the interests of the person, the interests of others and the public interest. The object of the gift contract is affected by the non compensation and the object of the paid contract is not completely one. The scope of the contract is much wider than that of the paid contract. Whether it is tangible property or intangible property, it can be regarded as the object of donation if it does not violate the provisions of the law.
The fourth chapter, "the effect of gratuitous on the 'invalidation' rule of the gift contract." in general, a paid contract does not have a "failure" rule. Once a contract has effect, it can not lose its effect. However, the contract of grant is affected by the non compensation, the contract granted the effect is lost under certain conditions. Therefore, the gift contract is given. There are three special rules for the loss of the contract, namely, the arbitrarily revocation right, the legal revocation right and the right of the plea of poverty. The purpose is to make up for the disequilibrium state of interest resulting from the gratuitous gift of the gift to others. Giving an unrestricted right to arbitrarily revocation is in conflict with the right itself. We can not allow the giver to break through the basic principles of the civil law as a result of the gratuitous nature of the gift contract. The right to sacrifice the basic principles at the expense of the basic principles is contrary to the basic spirit of the civil law, and it is suggested to be abolished without justification. The right of revocation and plea of poverty is an indispensable right to safeguard the interests of the donator. The legal revocation right is to punish the donee of "ungrateful" and to highlight the moral nature of the gift contract.
The fifth chapter, "the effect of gratuitous on the legal liability rules of the gift contract". The gratuitous nature of the grant contract not only affects the construction of its rights and obligations, but also has an impact on the legal responsibility of the two parties. In order to balance the loss of the property of the giver due to the gift, the measures adopted at the stage of responsibility are to reduce the legal responsibility of the donors, so as to achieve the legal responsibility of the donors. The purpose of encouragement is to be encouraged. The donor is not responsible for general negligence and is responsible only for deliberate and gross negligence; it is not liable for indirect losses and is only responsible for direct losses.
Conclusion: a brief review and perfect suggestion are made for the unpaid influence. We believe that we can not exaggerate the influence of the free sex on the rules of the grant contract. Only if we treat the influence of the gratuitous nature dialectically, we can realize the balance of interests between the two parties and improve the system of gift and contract.
Two, the innovation of the research and the problems to be further explored.
(I) possible innovations
1, there are some breakthroughs in the Perspective
From the perspective of gratuitous, it explores its influence on the contract rules of the grant. Compared with the paid contract, it may belong to the research in the new field, widening the scope and view of the contract rules and enriching the content of the contract system.
2, clarification of the unpaid influence
In the past, due to some misunderstanding, we exaggerated the effect of gratuitous on the rules of the gift contract. It was thought that the setting of the gift rules should be biased towards the giver to achieve a balance of interests. In fact, taking into account the interests of both parties is conducive to encouraging the donation and the unification of the legal effect and the social effect. In order to better guarantee the legitimate rights and interests of the parties, we can better realize the purpose of the gift and reduce the occurrence of the disputes.
3, the proposal to abolish the right of arbitrarily revocation
Under the influence of non compensation, the contract law of China has set up a system of arbitrarily revocation of "noo and not". It is not consistent with the national conditions of our country. Many disputes arising from the real life are caused by the "law" of the donor. The establishment of the arbitrarily revocation right is no doubt to those who are not good faith. On the pretext and reasons, on the one hand, it is true to promise to others how many properties will be given to others, on the one hand, to exercise the legal arbitrarily revocation right before the transfer of property rights, causing the contract to be revoked, which is not essentially different from the promise and "drama". On the basis of sex: first, it violates the principle of honesty and credit; second, it violates the principle of freedom of contract; third, it violates the principle of contract justice; and the allocation of arbitrarily revocation right is unbalanced and negative. Therefore, it puts forward the suggestion to abolish the right of arbitrarily revocation. In addition, the legal revocation right and the right of poverty defense have its rationality, suggestion Keep and perfect.
4, a new model of balance of interests between the two sides
On the basis of recommending the abolition of arbitrarily revocation right, the "distinction" model is put forward, which is more conducive to the balance of the interests of both sides, and is more in line with the national conditions of our country and the way of life of people. Contract, written contract is a contract of noo; distinction two: a gift contract which is delivered as a right by property, giving a contract as a contract for the purpose of public welfare or moral, and a gift contract with property registration as a right change.
(two) inadequacies
Because I am a judicial practice worker, the level of theory is limited and the complexity of the theory of gratuitous nature is complicated. Although I do our utmost, it is difficult to give consideration to the importance of priority, it is still difficult to control logic. To a certain extent, it affects the quality and integrity of the research. Through this study, I feel deeply ignorant of myself and tell myself that I will study harder in the future.
(three) questions to be further studied
The gift contract is affected by the non compensation, and it is necessary to give some preferential treatment to the donor. How to grasp the size of the preferential treatment? How to relieve the damage of the gift? How to identify the special gift? And so on, the further research is needed.
【学位授予单位】：西南财经大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D923.6

【参考文献】