合同附随义务司法认定问题研究

发布时间：2018-06-30 10:39

本文选题：合同附随义务 + 合同给付义务　；参考：《南京大学》2012年硕士论文

【摘要】：合同附随义务是指在合同履行过程中,伴随合同发展情形双方当事人为保护相对方人身和财产利益,基于诚信原则并根据合同性质、目的、交易习惯等应当承担的给付义务之外的义务。合同附随义务的认定是责任判定和承担的前提。对于附随义务在个案中的认定,一直以来是实践中的一个重要难题,在我国司法实践中,法院对合同附随义务的适用做了有意义的探索,但对该义务的理解和适用还处于比较浅显的阶段。通过研究典型案例,笔者发现,合同附随义务在司法认定过程中存在的最突出的问题是认定失当,法官往往将附随义务与主给付义务、从给付义务以及安全保障义务混淆。整体来看,我国学者对合同附随义务的理论研究尚不成熟,还有很多争议之处。我国合同法第60条第2款引入了该制度,为附随义务的认定提供了法律依据,但因其笼统和抽象性,司法认定中更多依赖法官的自由裁量,而司法裁判过程中没有建立一套裁量原则和认定方法。具体来看,合同附随义务和主给付义务的混淆的原因有：理论界对合同附随义务的法源基础认识不统一,合同法第60条第2款对附随义务的规定较为笼统,而且司法认定过程中普遍存在将经当事人约定的附随义务上升为合同主给付义务的处理办法。由于合同附随义务与从给付义务都是诚实信用原则派生的义务形式,在不确定性等诸多方面具有一定的相似性,因此,如何区分合同附随义务和从给付义务是相对更困难的实践问题。理论和实践中对该问题的处理尚没有完备之策,笔者尝试提出一种解决思路,将合同附随义务设定为仅保护当事人的固有利益,从而与以给付利益实现为目标的从给付义务在理论上厘清界限。合同附随义务通过保护合同当事人履行利益之外的人身和财产利益,实现维护合同关系当事人正当权益,维护交易安全和秩序,保障社会经济的良性高效运转和实现社会正义的价值目标。在现有合同法体系下,利用已有的司法经验与学术总结,将附随义务在不同合同领域、行为模式下的不同义务加以分析,提出一个相对统一的认定准则和方法是当务之急。司法实践中,合同附随义务的认定要遵循密切联系原则、利益衡量原则、严格限制原则。具体来讲,就债权人提起的要求对方承担某项义务的诉求,法官应当现审查合同内容是否有相关约定,并依据诚信原则判断是否成立附随义务；在没有具体合同条款约定的情形下,检索相关法规,寻找法律依据；在没有合同约定和法律规定时,依据诚信原则,结合合同性质、目的,参照行业习惯或是双方之间特有的交易习惯判断该义务是否成立。
[Abstract]:Contract collateral obligation means that in the process of contract performance, in order to protect the personal and property interests of the opposite party, the parties concerned are based on the principle of good faith, according to the nature and purpose of the contract, in order to protect the personal and property interests of the opposite party. Trading habits and other obligations beyond the obligation to pay. The confirmation of contract collateral obligation is the premise of responsibility judgment and undertaking. The determination of collateral obligation in cases has always been an important problem in practice. In the judicial practice of our country, the court has made a meaningful exploration on the application of contract collateral obligation. However, the understanding and application of this obligation is still in a relatively simple stage. Through the study of typical cases, the author finds that the most prominent problem of the contract collateral obligation in the course of judicial cognizance is the improper identification. The judge often confuses the collateral obligation with the principal obligation, the obligation of payment and the obligation of safety and security. On the whole, the theoretical research on the collateral obligation of contract is not mature, and there are still many controversies. The second paragraph of Article 60 of the contract Law of our country has introduced the system, which provides the legal basis for the confirmation of collateral obligation, but because of its generality and abstractness, the judicial determination depends more on the discretion of the judge. However, there is not a set of discretion principle and determination method in the process of judicial adjudication. Specifically, the confusion between contract collateral obligation and principal payment obligation is due to the fact that the theoretical circle has different understanding of the legal basis of contract collateral obligation, and the stipulation of collateral obligation in Article 60 (2) of contract Law is more general. In the process of judicial cognizance, there is a way to change the collateral obligation agreed by the parties to the obligation of the principal payment of the contract. Because the contract collateral obligation and the obligation to pay from the contract are both forms of obligations derived from the principle of good faith, there are certain similarities in many aspects, such as uncertainty, etc. How to distinguish the contract collateral obligation from the slave obligation is a more difficult practical problem. In theory and practice, there is not a complete way to deal with this problem. The author tries to put forward a way to solve the problem, and set the contract collateral obligation as only protecting the inherent interests of the parties. Therefore, it clarifies the theoretical boundary with the obligation to pay in order to realize the benefit of giving. By protecting the personal and property interests other than the interests of the parties to the contract, the obligations attached to the contract realize the protection of the legitimate rights and interests of the parties to the contract, and the maintenance of the security and order of the transactions, To ensure the healthy and efficient operation of the social economy and to achieve the value of social justice. Under the existing contract law system, it is urgent to analyze the different obligations under different contract fields and behavior patterns by using the existing judicial experience and academic summary, and to put forward a relatively uniform criterion and method of confirmation. In judicial practice, the confirmation of contract collateral obligation should follow the principle of close relation, interest measurement and strict restriction. Specifically, as to the creditor's claim that the other party should undertake a certain obligation, the judge should now examine whether there is a relevant agreement in the content of the contract, and judge whether the collateral obligation is established according to the principle of good faith; In the absence of specific contractual provisions, search for relevant laws and regulations and seek legal basis; when there is no contractual agreement or legal provision, in accordance with the principle of good faith, in combination with the nature and purpose of the contract, Judge whether the obligation is valid by reference to trade practices or specific trading habits between the parties.
【学位授予单位】：南京大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D923.6

【参考文献】