不安抗辩权与预期违约制度比较研究

发布时间：2018-06-15 02:12

本文选题：不安抗辩权 + 预期违约　；参考：《华东政法大学》2013年硕士论文

【摘要】：不安抗辩权制度是大陆法系的一项传统制度，与同时履行抗辩权一起，构成了完整的抗辩权制度，其起源自德国民法，大陆法系各国都规定了不安抗辩制度。不安抗辩权的设置体现了公平、效率等法的价值，是对合同双方当事人利益的平衡，有效保护交易安全。预期违约制度是由英美法系的判例法发展起来的，是在司法实践中的积累和归纳。美国《统一商法典》和《联合国国际货物销售合同公约》对于预期违约制度又有所吸收和完善。两大制度来源于两大不同的法系，但是从功能上看都是保护当事人的在合同履行期前的期待利益，具有很多相似之处，当然，也存在较大不同。我国《合同法》在制定过程中，以大陆法系的不安抗辩权为基础，又吸收了预期违约制度的相关规定，构成了我国特有的保护履行前当事人利益的制度，但是可以说由于多种制度的糅杂，也导致了我国合同法的两种制度适用上的混乱。为了寻求解决我国两种制度适应性的途径，使其可以融会贯通，笔者将从4个部分阐述。第一部分阐明不安抗辩权的概念和各国立法现状，比较各国立法的利弊，，并分析不安抗辩权的适用条件。第二部分阐明预期违约制度的起源和成名案例，分别讲诉明示预期违约和默示预期违约的不同，并分析预期违约的构成要件。第三部分对于不安抗辩权和预期违约制度进行比较，分析两者的相同之处和差异，并阐明笔者观点，预期违约制度更具有优越性。第四部分分析我国《合同法》中关于两大制度的立法现状，分析其对于两大法系的法律移植的成功之处和不足的地方。针对有所缺失之处提出自己的建议。
[Abstract]:As a traditional system of civil law system, the system of uneasiness right of defense, together with the right of simultaneous performance of defense, constitutes a complete system of right of defense, which originates from the German civil law, and is stipulated by all countries in the civil law system. The establishment of the right of restless defense embodies the value of law such as fairness and efficiency. It is the balance of the interests of both parties to the contract and the effective protection of transaction security. The system of anticipatory breach of contract is developed from the case law of Anglo-American law system and is accumulated and summarized in judicial practice. The United States Commercial Code and the United Nations Convention on contracts for the International Sale of goods have absorbed and perfected the system of anticipatory breach of contract. The two systems come from two different legal systems, but they protect the expected interests of the parties before the contract performance period, and have many similarities, of course, there are great differences. In the process of making the contract Law of our country, it is based on the civil law system's right of restless defense and absorbs the relevant provisions of the system of anticipatory breach of contract, which constitutes the special system of protecting the interests of the parties before performance in our country. However, it can be said that because of the mixture of various systems, it also leads to confusion in the application of the two systems of contract law in China. In order to find a way to solve the two kinds of system adaptability in our country, the author will expound from four parts. The first part clarifies the concept of the right of restless defense and the current situation of legislation in various countries, compares the advantages and disadvantages of the legislation of various countries, and analyzes the applicable conditions of the right of defense of unease. The second part clarifies the origin and famous cases of anticipatory breach of contract, respectively, tells the difference between express anticipatory breach of contract and implied breach of contract, and analyzes the constitutive elements of anticipatory breach of contract. In the third part, the author makes a comparison between the right of restless defense and the system of anticipatory breach of contract, analyzes their similarities and differences, and clarifies the author's view that the system of anticipatory breach of contract has more advantages. The fourth part analyzes the current legislative situation of the two systems in the contract Law of China, and analyzes the successes and shortcomings of the two legal systems. Put forward your own suggestions for some deficiencies.
【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】：D923.6

【参考文献】