合同解除异议权制度探究

发布时间：2018-06-22 16:38

本文选题：合同解除 + 合同解除异议　；参考：《海南大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：《合同法》第96条赋予了被解约方对解除权人的解除行为提出异议的权利,这是合同解除异议制度的雏形。《最高人民法院关于适用中华人民共和国合同法若干问题的解释(二)》(以下简称"《合同法解释二》")第24条规定首次规定了异议期间,使合同解除异议权的行使成为可能。此两条规定在司法实践中为平衡合同双方的合法权益与统一案件的裁量标准发挥了重大作用。但是,合同解除异议权制度在法律规定上仍然略显粗糙,关于合同解除异议权制度的一系列问题在法律规定上仍有很大的空白。为了增强合同解除异议制度的实用性,加深对合同解除异议制度的理解,笔者通过本文对合同解除异议制度提出新的思考角度,全文分为四个部分:第一部分是对合同解除异议权制度的存在的形成背景及制度价值进行论述。设立合同解除异议制度的目的在于平衡合同当事人的权益,即对合同解除权人行使合同解除权提出更高的要求,加强对被解约方利益的保护。第二部分是通过对合同解除异议权性质学说利弊的分析,为重新审视合同解除异议权的性质提供一种新的思路。法律没有对合同解除异议权作出细致的规定,在司法实践中对于合同解除异议权的性质如何界定存在很大的争议。对于合同解除异议权的性质,理论界有请求权说、形成反对权说、程序法上的诉权说。该部分通过对合同解除异议权性质典型学说的介绍,阐明各学说的利弊,并以此为突破口,论证笔者对于合同解除异议制度的见解。第三部分是通过分析合同解除异议权行使过程中需要注意的问题,为异议权适用中存在的问题提供新的解决思路。本部分对合同解除异议权提起的方式、异议期间、提起合同解除异议的法律后果进行分析,明确合同解除异议权在司法适用中存在的争议,并针对此争议问题提出笔者的看法和观点。第四部分是对异议权人逾期提起合同解除异议在法院审查过程中存在问题的分析。在司法实践中,法院对于逾期提起的合同解除异议采取不同的审查模式,导致截然不同的判决结果,损害了司法的公信力。本文通过对两种审查模式的论证论述统一审查模式的重要性,并对该种审查模式提出建议。
[Abstract]:Article 96 of the contract Law gives the abrogated party the right to object to the dissolution of the person who has the right to rescind, This is the embryonic form of the system of dissent from the contract. Article 24 of the Supreme people's Court on the interpretation of certain issues concerning the Application of the contract Law of the people's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as "interpretation of contract Law II") provides for the first time a period of objection. Make possible the exercise of the right of dissent from the contract. These two provisions play an important role in balancing the legal rights and interests of both parties to the contract and unifying the discretion of cases in judicial practice. However, the system of the right to dissent from the contract is still slightly rough on the legal provisions, and there is still a great gap in the legal provisions on a series of issues concerning the system of dissenting rights of the rescission of the contract. In order to enhance the practicability of the dissent system of contract rescission and to deepen the understanding of the dissent system of contract rescission, the author puts forward a new angle of thinking on the dissent system of rescission of contract through this article. The paper is divided into four parts: the first part is to discuss the formation background and system value of the system of dissenting right of rescission of contract. The purpose of setting up the dissent system of contract rescission is to balance the rights and interests of the parties to the contract, that is to say, to put forward higher requirements for the party to exercise the right of rescission of the contract, and to strengthen the protection of the interests of the party to be dissolved. The second part is to analyze the advantages and disadvantages of the nature of the right to rescind the contract and to provide a new way of thinking to re-examine the nature of the right of dissent. The law does not make detailed provisions on the right to dissent from contract, and there is a great dispute about how to define the nature of the right to dissent from contract in judicial practice. As to the nature of the right of dissent from the contract, the theorists have the theory of the right of claim, the theory of the right of objection and the theory of the right of action in procedural law. This part expounds the advantages and disadvantages of each theory through the introduction of the typical theory of the nature of the right to dissent from the contract, and takes it as a breakthrough to demonstrate the author's opinion on the system of dissent from the termination of contract. The third part is to analyze the problems that should be paid attention to in the exercise of the right of dissent of contract, and to provide a new way to solve the problems existing in the application of the right of dissent. This part analyzes the legal consequences of the dissent of the contract during the period of dissent, and clarifies the disputes existing in the judicial application of the right to dissent from the contract. And put forward the author's views and viewpoints in view of this controversial issue. The fourth part is the analysis of the problems existing in the process of court review. In the judicial practice, the court adopts different examination mode to the challenge of the termination of the contract which is overdue, which leads to the different judgment result and damages the credibility of the judicature. This paper discusses the importance of unified examination model through the demonstration of two kinds of examination models, and puts forward some suggestions on this kind of examination mode.
【学位授予单位】：海南大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D923.6

【相似文献】