合同法定形式研究

发布时间：2018-07-10 03:20

本文选题：合同 + 法定形式　；参考：《南京大学》2013年硕士论文

【摘要】：通过对欧陆主要法律的契约形式的历史梳理可以看出,在不注重个人权利的历史时期,统治者通过法律的强制性严格管控社会。我国古代通过严格的契约形式来管控市场交易,对合同的格式进行严格的要求,刑法与民事不分,把法的形式理性的制度化发挥到极致。很显然,无论欧洲大陆还是中国古代的法律制定者,对形式理性有着崇高的信仰。毫无疑问,合同形式的强制有其内在的合理性,比如对书面合同形式的强制规定,书面形式的证据效力是毋庸置疑的,证明当事人双方签订合同合意的存在,根据合同当事人合意后“禁反言”的原则,以维护交易稳定。正是由于有这个证明力,这就可以敦促当事人谨慎行事,为自己的权利义务负责。同时,规定合同形式也有利于对市场进行有效的管理。但是,合同毕竟是当事人自由意志的结果,对其干预过度就会造成市场交易的不顺畅。这就要求对合同形式的法定有所克制,而不可泛滥,否则就会过度干预市场,侵犯私权。这是适应我国当前继续改革开放的大趋势,改革就是对内放权,市场的归市场,市场管理者把在自由的市场经济环境下本属于市场主体的权利让位出来,由市场主体自由行使自己的私权。为了限制法律对合同形式的强制范围,可以通过诚实信用等伦理规则和类似《合同法》第36条对合同形式强制的软化治愈进行调整。这是从实质正义的角度来化解形式正义带来的问题,从而对合同的形式强制进行一定的调整。这种调整并不是没有限制的,应该符合相关的条件要求,以保证法律的安定性和严肃性。反过来,这些条件也是对引用诚实信用原则的限制,也即并不是任何情形只要违背诚实信用都可以引用之,诚实信用原则只是一种填补方案,只在特殊情形才可适用。《合同法》第36条对合同形式强制的软化治愈顺应了合同当事人的期望,在一定程度上方便了当事人对合同形式的要求,改变了法定强制形式的僵化。但是,这种软化治愈也并不是没有边界,为了维护法律的安定,对其治愈需要有较严格的限制。我国法律对合同法定形式的治愈是作为一般条款规定在合同法的第36条。这显然把这种合同的治愈的范围扩大了,使得第10条的功能大大降低。因此,笔者认为对第36条的适用应该慎重,可以把这个法条的理念分布在能够治愈的领域,作为单独的例外,而不是作为一般的治愈条款。合同形式的法定与当事人合法的合意之间并没有根本的矛盾,只是法律在复杂的社会情境面前显得力不从心,毕竟法律只是对普遍现象的抽象统一规定。这就需要在法律适用时综合考量法律内在法理和法律与社会外在的如政治、经济、道德伦理等因素的关系,对法律进行适当的调整,以适应社会的需要。
[Abstract]:By combing the history of the contract forms of the main laws in Europe, we can see that in the historical period of not paying attention to the individual rights, the rulers strictly controlled the society through the compulsory control of the law. In ancient China, market transactions were controlled by strict contract form, and the form of contract was strictly required. Criminal law was not separated from civil law, and the system of formal rationality of law was brought into full play. It is clear that both continental Europe and ancient Chinese legal makers have a lofty faith in formal rationality. There is no doubt that the compulsory form of contract has its inherent reasonableness. For example, the compulsory stipulation on the form of a written contract, the evidentiary effect of the written form is beyond doubt, proving the existence of the parties' agreement to sign the contract. According to the agreement of the parties to the contract after the "estoppel" principle, in order to maintain the stability of the transaction. It is because of this power of proof that the parties are urged to exercise caution and be held accountable for their rights and obligations. At the same time, the regulation of contract form is also conducive to the effective management of the market. However, the contract is the result of the free will of the parties. This requires restraint of the legal form of contract, but not flooding, otherwise excessive intervention in the market, infringement of private rights. This is to adapt to the general trend of our country's ongoing reform and opening up. Reform is the decentralization of power within the country, the return of the market to the market, and market managers give way to the rights that belong to the main body of the market in a free market economy environment. Free exercise of private rights by the market subject. In order to limit the compulsory scope of contract form by law, we can adjust the softening and cure of contract form compulsion by virtue of ethical rules such as good faith and similar article 36 of contract law. This is from the angle of substantive justice to resolve the problems brought by formal justice, and thus to make certain adjustments to the form of contract. This adjustment is not unlimited, should meet the relevant requirements to ensure the stability and seriousness of the law. In turn, these conditions are restrictions on invoking the principle of good faith, that is, it is not always possible to invoke the principle of good faith as long as it is contrary to good faith. The principle of good faith is only a filling scheme. Article 36 of the contract Law can only be applied in special circumstances. The softening and curing of the form of contract by Article 36 conforms to the expectations of the parties to the contract, and to a certain extent facilitates the parties' request for the form of the contract. Changed the rigidity of the statutory form of compulsion. However, the softening cure is not borderless. In order to maintain the legal stability, the cure needs to be strictly limited. The cure of legal form of contract in our country is stipulated as general clause in Article 36 of contract Law. This obviously extends the scope of the contract's cure, greatly reducing the function of Article 10. Therefore, the author thinks that the application of article 36 should be cautious, that the idea of this article can be distributed in the field of cure, as a separate exception, rather than as a general cure clause. There is no fundamental contradiction between the legal form of contract and the legitimate consent of the parties. It is just that the law is unable to cope with the complicated social situation. After all, the law is only an abstract and unified stipulation of the universal phenomenon. It is necessary to consider the internal legal theory and the relationship between law and social external factors such as politics, economy, moral ethics and so on, and adjust the law to meet the needs of the society.
【学位授予单位】：南京大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：D913

【参考文献】