或有期间三论

发布时间：2018-02-11 23:56

本文关键词： 或有期间民法典诉讼时效除斥期间　出处：《北方法学》2017年01期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：或有期间研究的一个必然逻辑起点就是论证或有期间真伪问题。从制度的本源上展开分析,或有期间与诉讼时效和除斥期间具有本质上的差异,乃为独立存在的期间制度。然存在或有期间却并非当然具有存在之必要,还需要论证或有期间具有存在的合理性、必要性。或有期间应当是具有独特存在价值之制度,即能够通过限制处于比较优势地位的一方当事人获得或行使特定的权利,结束权利所处的不确定状态,从而妥当地均衡双方当事人之间权利义务关系。或有期间制度的构建则应当遵循或有期间内在价值的指导,着眼于"严格性"的基本定位,同时尊重当事人意思自治,兼顾公平,以安排或有期间基本制度的具体内容。或有期间制度的基本规定应当与诉讼时效和除斥期间并列规定于我国未来民法典期间制度一章节之中。
[Abstract]:An inevitable logical starting point for the study of a period of time is to prove that it is true or false. From the source of the system, there is an essential difference between the period of limitation and the period of exclusion. It is a period system of independent existence. However, the existence or existence of a period is not necessarily necessary, but it also needs to be demonstrated that the existence of a period is reasonable and necessary. Or the period should be a system of unique existential value, That is, by restricting a party in a position of comparative advantage to acquire or exercise a particular right, to end the uncertainty of the right, In order to properly balance the relationship between the rights and obligations of the two parties, the construction of the contingent system should follow the guidance of the inherent value of the contingent period, focus on the basic orientation of "strictness", and at the same time respect the autonomy of the parties. In order to arrange the specific contents of the basic system of the contingent period, the basic provisions of the contingent system should be stipulated in the chapter of the period system of the future civil code of our country in parallel with the limitation of action and the period of exclusion.
【作者单位】：中南大学法学院;
【基金】：国家社科基金重大课题“民法典编纂重大疑难问题研究”(14ZDC017)与“法治湖南2011协同中心”的阶段性成果
【分类号】：D923

【相似文献】