中澳离婚制度比较研究

发布时间：2018-01-07 11:04

本文关键词：中澳离婚制度比较研究　出处：《山西大学》2007年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】： 离婚是社会学和婚姻家庭法学共同关注的问题，也是各国普遍关心的问题之一，离婚制度在一个国家的立法中占有重要地位。上世纪六十年代开始，世界各国先后对离婚制度进行了改革以应对离婚人数增加引发的种种社会问题。在这一离婚制度改革的浪潮中，澳大利亚的经验引起世界的关注。其先于1975年对离婚制度作了重大改革，引进了无过错离婚主义，颁布了体现现代离婚法基本精神的联邦家庭法。之后，又针对离婚制度改革后出现的一些新的问题，本着以人为本，子女利益优先的指导思想，对家庭法作了多次修改，目前关于离婚的各方面规定可以说相对完善。特别是在方便当事人、提高司法效率和保护子女利益方面，澳大利亚颇有建树，许多做法为别国所关注与吸收，如离婚理由立法被英国所借鉴，专业家事法院设置为新西兰所采用。我国在1980年重新制订婚姻法的基础上，又应时代要求于2001年对离婚制度作了部分修改，但总体上讲，我国的离婚制度改革起点低，进程慢，立法与司法仍存在种种不足。对两国离婚制度进行比较研究，有助于了解国外离婚具体制度的建立运转情况，有助于了解现代离婚法的基本趋势，并最终为修订与完善我国新世纪的离婚制度提供参考资料及立法建议。然而在我国，目前国内专门研究澳大利亚离婚制度的著述并不多见。笔者不才，拟从程序法与实体法两方面对中澳两国的离婚制度进行综合比较，介绍各自立法，评析各自特点，并提出相关建议，以期为我国的离婚制度改革尽一点微薄之力。本文共分为五个部分。第一部分是对中澳两国离婚制度基本特点的比较。该部分主要从立法指导思想、立法特点上对两国的离婚类型、离婚理由、离婚与子女对待、离婚程序及离婚后果等方面进行了概括说明，并就双方异同作了比较分析。文章指出，中澳两国的离婚立法在一些基本理念上具有相通之处，如都主张离婚自由、保障男女平等、保护儿童权益等。但在具体规定上，无论是离婚立法目的方面，还是离婚的程序、后果方面都存在较大差异。产生差异的原因有很多，如社会制度的不同、立法时代背景的不同、法治水平的不同、立法者的重视程度不同等。但根据马克思主义“婚姻家庭制度由经济基础决定”的观点，两国立法存在较大差距的最根本原因应是各自所处的社会发展阶段不同。文末还对澳大利亚离婚制度的最新改革内容作了阐述。第二部分是对两国离婚方式的比较。离婚首先有一个选择何种离婚方式的问题。本部分对我国的协议离婚、诉讼离婚和澳大利亚的判决离婚作了介绍、评析，并在此基础上，重点对协议离婚方式的未来走向作了深入阐述。文章最后指出，在离婚方式上，可供当事人选择的方式是一种还是多种并不重要，重要的是这一方式所指向的立法内容，即如何保护子女最佳利益，如何平等对待夫妻的权利义务，以及如何提高司法效率、方便当事人诉讼上。第三部分是对两国离婚理由的比较。在详介两国离婚理由立法的基础上，该部分从破裂主义的表述、破裂的认定方式、分居规定、无过错责任的限制等方面对中澳两国存在的差异作了具体说明，并指出我国的离婚理由规定缺乏明确的破裂事实认定标准，仅靠不断增加具体认定情形的做法比较费力，建议采取澳大利亚对婚姻关系破裂的认定方法，即以一定的分居期间为客观依据，降低法官在离婚问题上的自由裁量权，既保证离婚自由，也给当事人以充分的考虑期间。第四部分是对两国离婚程序的比较。该部分在介绍澳大利亚审理离婚案件的专门法院、专门的诉讼程序的基础上，分析了专门法院、专门程序对解决离婚问题的优势所在，提出为真正落实婚姻家事立法精神，有效保障妇女、儿童权益，我国也应向澳大利亚一样，除了设立专业的法院(或法庭)以外，实有必要制定专门的家事事件处理程序。文中对澳大利亚与我国的调解程序也作了比较，指出随着离婚法重点向子女问题的转移，澳大利亚离婚诉讼本身的程序日趋简易，在解决离婚带来的子女养育问题上，，越来越重视调解等非讼方式的完善，而且，在子女问题的庭审程序上，2006年修改后的家事法也支持一种减少对抗性的审理方式。第五部分是对两国离婚后果的比较。主要围绕子女问题与财产问题这两个问题展开。首先从离婚后父母子女间的关系、抚养费的负担和分配、探望权规定等方面各自介绍了两国离婚对子女的法律后果，然后对澳大利亚子女立法进行析评，并指明可供我国的借鉴之处。特别强调我国应尽快在立法中确立子女最佳利益原则，并以“父母共同养育责任”代替体现父权观念的“监护权”概念。财产问题主要围绕夫妻财产分配问题进行论述，从财产范围的确定、财产分割的类型、财产分割的原则及考虑因素等方面比较了两国的夫妻财产分配制度，并指出我国应在财产问题解决的程序上和配套制度建设上借鉴澳大利亚的做法，以保证财产分配的合理、公正解决。
[Abstract]:Divorce is the common concern of sociology and family law, and it is also one of the countries concerned, the divorce system plays an important role in a country's legislation. In the last century the beginning of 60s, the world has reformed divorce system to cope with the increase in the number of divorce caused by social problems. In this divorce in the tide of reform, the Australian experience attracted the attention of the world. First in 1975, a major reform of the system of divorce, the introduction of no fault divorce, issued by the federal family law embody the basic spirit of the modern divorce law. Then, aiming at some new problems appeared after the reform of divorce system based on people-oriented, guidance the thought of children's interests first, family law as a number of changes, at present all aspects of the regulations on divorce can be said relatively perfect. Especially in the convenience of the parties In order to improve judicial efficiency and protect children's interests, Australia has made many achievements. Many practices are concerned and absorbed by other countries. For example, the legislation on divorce grounds is learned by the United Kingdom, and the professional family court is set up for New Zealand.
China in 1980 to re formulate the marriage law, and should be the requirements of the times in 2001 of the divorce system made some changes, but generally speaking, China's divorce system reform process is slow, low starting point, there are still many problems existing in legislation and judicature. A comparative study of the divorce system, contribute to the understanding of foreign divorce specific system functioning, the basic trend is helpful to understand the modern divorce law, and ultimately the revision and improvement of our country in the new century the divorce system to provide reference and suggestions for legislation in our country. However, the current Australian divorce system works devoted to the study of domestic rare. The author not only, to two from the procedural law and the substantive law of the countries divorce system were comprehensively compared the respective legislation, analyses their characteristics, and puts forward related suggestions, with a view to China's reform of the system of divorce a little Power.
This article is divided into five parts.
The first part is the basic characteristics of the two countries. This part of the divorce system mainly from the legislative guiding ideology, legislative characteristics of two types of divorce, divorce, divorce and child treatment, divorce proceedings and the consequences of divorce and other aspects of the outline, and made a comparative analysis on the similarities and differences between two parties. The article points out. The two countries of the divorce legislation have similarities in some of the basic concepts, such as advocating the freedom of divorce, safeguard the equality between men and women, the protection of children's rights. But in the specific provisions, whether the legislative intent of divorce, or divorce procedures, the consequences are quite different. There are many reasons for the differences, such as the different social system, legislation of different background, different level of the rule of law, the degree of attention of legislators different. But according to Marx's "marriage and family system by the economic basis decision" concept The most fundamental reason for the great difference between the two countries should be their different stages of social development. At the end of the paper, the latest reform contents of Australian divorce system are also discussed.
The second part is the comparison of the two methods of divorce. Divorce first have a choice of divorce way. This part of our divorce, divorce proceedings are introduced, and Australia's divorce judgment analysis, and on this basis, focus on the future directionof divorce way deeply in this paper. At the end of this paper pointed out that in the way of divorce, for parties to choose the way is a variety or is not important, important is the way to the contents of the legislation, how to protect the best interests of the child, how to treat the couple's rights and obligations, as well as how to improve the judicial efficiency, facilitate the parties to litigation.
The third part is the comparison of the grounds for divorce. On the basis of legislation on two grounds for divorce are referred, the part from the doctrine of rupture, rupture of the expression, separation that no fault liability provisions, restrictions and other aspects of a specific explanation of the differences between the two countries, and pointed out that China's lack of provisions of the grounds for divorce the rupture criterion of facts, by increasing specific circumstances more laborious, recommended Australia rupture of marriage method to determine that during a certain separation as the objective basis, reduce the discretion of law officer in divorce on the right, not only guarantee the freedom of divorce, also give full consideration to the parties during the period.
The fourth part is the comparison of the divorce procedures. This part introduced Australia special court hearing the divorce case, based on the special procedure, analyzes the special court special program to solve the problem of divorce advantage, put forward to implement the marriage family legislation spirit, effectively protect the interests of women, children, China shouldalso Australia, in addition to the establishment of specialized Court (or court), it is necessary to develop special family event handlers. The Australia and China's Mediation Program is also compared with the transfer, pointed out that the key to the problem of children of divorce law, Australia divorce procedures more simple in itself, to solve the problem of child rearing caused by divorce, more and more attention to the improvement of mediation and ADR, in the case of children of the trial procedure, after the 2006 revision of the family The law also supports a way to reduce adversarial trials.
The fifth part is the consequences of divorce. The main problem of children with this property around two issues. Firstly, from the relationship between parents and children after divorce, alimony and burden distribution, visitation rights provisions and other aspects of their respective countries introduced the legal consequences of divorce on children, then the children of Australian legislation analysis evaluation, and points out for our reference. Especially China should as soon as possible to establish the principle of best interests of the child in the legislation, and to "co parenting responsibilities" instead reflect the patriarchal ideas "custody" concept. The property problem focuses on marital property allocation problem is discussed, from the scope of property, type the division of property, property division principles and considerations and other aspects of the marital property distribution system between the two countries, and points out that China should solve the problems in property and matching program In order to ensure the reasonable and fair solution of the distribution of property, the construction of the system should be used for reference to the practice of Australia.

【学位授予单位】：山西大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2007
【分类号】：D913.9

【参考文献】