论消费者合同中不公平格式条款

发布时间：2018-03-23 16:36

本文选题：消费者合同　切入点：格式条款　出处：《西南政法大学》2016年硕士论文

【摘要】：在19世纪,无论是大陆法系国家,还是英美法系国家,契约的观念都深入人心,契约自由成为各国合同法普遍遵守的基本原则,19世纪因此被誉为“契约的世纪”。但随着19世纪后期到来,社会经济的迅速发展,合同双方当事人经济地位的差距日益悬殊,绝对的契约自由开始衰落。尤其是格式条款的广泛采用,具有雄厚经济实力的大企业经营者对弱势的消费者契约自由的侵蚀,“合同自由大部分已经成为幻影”。不仅如此,企业经营者也基于其在提供商品或服务的专业优势,以格式条款的形式侵害消费者的权益,而消费者却对此鲜有救济的途径与能力。对此,各国纷纷开始通过立法对“绝对的契约自由”加以限制,并通过行政管理等手段对合同内容进行监督和管理。契约正义应与契约自由同等重要,根据正义的要求,合同双方当事人都有权在订立合同之时平等自由地表达自己的意愿,按诚信原则之内容,依契约之约定履行义务,而不能将契约作为谋取自身不合理甚至非法利益的工具。例如,《德国民法典》专章对格式条款的定义、纳入合同的规则以及对不公平格式条款的规制做出相应的规定;日本专门制定《消费者契约法》针对格式条款形成了以“民法基本原则为基础的私法规制模式”的规制模式。20世纪90年代以来,日益增加的格式条款纠纷使得国内立法者意识到规范格式条款的必要性,相继出台了《合同法》、《消费者权益保护法》、《海商法》、《保险法》等多部法律以及相关规定对格式条款作出了初步的规范。虽现行规定仍存在一定问题,但就规制格式条款而言还是发挥着重要的作用。本文主要的论述对象为消费者合同中的不公平格式条款,将关于消费者合同中的格式条款的内容分为不公平判断标准、效力标准以及行政规制手段等五个部分,分别进行论述。第一部分为消费者合同中不公平格式条款的现状及问题。简述了消费者合同、消费者、经营者等基本概念,以及一般不公平格式条款与消费者合同中不公平格式条款的各自的特点及二者的区别。其次,简单地对消费者合同中不公平格式条款的适用现状进行说明,并有针对性地分析了我国现行规定,从而发现现行法律规定并未对格式条款形成统一的规范及现行规定下关于消费者合同中格式条款存在的问题。最后将现行规定下存在的问题从三个方面进行阐述,即实体法问题、行政规制问题以及司法救济问题。第二部分为消费者合同中格式条款的不公平的判断标准。该部分从比较法的角度,分别就德国法、英国法、日本法以及大陆规定和台湾规定中有关格式条款不公平的判断标准进行了论述。德国《民法典》第307-309条列出“黑名单”、“灰名单”及原则性判断标准作为格式条款不公平的判断依据;英国则以专门法案针对所有不公平条款作出了规定,这些规定同样适用于格式条款的不公平判断;日本《消费者契约法》第8-10条规定消费者契约中不公平格式条款的类型,这些不公平格式条款因其内容造成合同双方权利义务的重大失衡而效力被否定;我国台湾地区“消费者保护法”及配套的实施细则规定了不公平格式条款概念化、抽象性的判断标准,因此对格式条款不公平的判断还需法官的裁量;而我国大陆地区主要规定了违反《合同法》第52、53条所具体规定的以及免除或限制经营者责任,抑或是加重消费者义务等几类不公平条款,但法律规定之间存在相冲突之处。第三部分为消费者合同中不公平格式条款的效力判断。对不公平格式条款的效力判断需综合考量合同类型、缔约情形、双方当事人权利义务是否严重失衡等因素来进行判断。可根据效力类别将不公平格式条款的效力分为无效、可撤销两个部分,一般而言效力无效的不公平格式条款内容违反法律强制性规定或存在造成消费者重大利益受损的可能;效力可撤销的不公平格式条款内容的不公平程度并未达到严重不公平的程度或者可能因经营者未履行相应的义务而导致法律效力被部分否定。第四部分为消费者合同中不公平格式条款的行政规制。主要分为了纳入与不纳入审查、缔约前的事先审核制度包括了格式条款的备案制度、听证制度及公告制度;而双方当事人进入对合同的履行阶段,有关行政规制的手段主要是事后的行政处罚层面。我国尚未设置专门机构处理格式条款的相关问题,而行政规定大多比较分散不集中,不利于消费者的保护,因此完善行政规制制度对消费者的保护至关重要的。第五部分为消费者合同中不公平格式条款的司法救济。简单论述了当受侵害的消费者人数众多时,可向消费者提供的司法救济模式:集团诉讼和公益诉讼。最新修订的《民事诉讼法》中已明确公益诉讼的制度,但仍需进一步公益诉讼作出规定;集团诉讼尚无规定,但通过对集团诉讼与代表人诉讼的对比,说明集团诉讼针对侵害众多消费者的情形可能更有实际效果。
[Abstract]:In nineteenth Century, both continental law countries or the common law countries, the concept of the contract are popular, the freedom of contract has become the basic principle of contract law countries generally comply with the nineteenth Century, therefore known as the "contract of the century". But with the arrival of the late nineteenth Century, the rapid development of the social economy, the parties of the economic status of the growing gap the poor, absolute freedom of contract began to decline. Especially the widely used format terms, erosion of consumer freedom of contract for weak with strong economic strength of the business operators, "has become the most by the contract from the phantom". Moreover, operators of the enterprises based on the supply of goods or services, professional advantage, in terms of format the form of infringement of the rights of consumers, and consumers have little ability and ways of relief. In this regard, many countries began to pass legislation on the "vast To limit the freedom of contract ", and through administrative means of supervision and management of the contract. The contract justice should be equally important and the freedom of contract, according to the requirements of justice, the parties have the right to express their opinions freely equal to the time of contract, according to the content of the contract according to the principle of good faith. The agreed obligations, not to seek their own contract as unreasonable or illegal interests. For example, the definition of" German Civil Code > chapter on the format of the terms of the contract, into the rules and regulation on unfair terms of format and make the corresponding provisions; Japan specially formulated < consumer contract law > in terms of format form the mode of "private law" regulation is based on the basic principles of the civil law regulation mode of the.20 century since 90s, the terms of disputes increasing format makes the domestic legislators aware of rules The necessity of fan format terms, have issued a "contract law", "Consumer Protection Law > >, < < maritime law, insurance law > and other laws and relevant provisions of the terms of the format to make a preliminary specification. Although the current regulations there are still some problems, but the regulation of the standard clauses or play an important role. This paper discusses the main object for the form of unfair terms in consumer contracts, on the format of the terms in consumer contracts consists of unfair judgment standard, the five part of the effectiveness of standards and administrative regulation means, respectively. The first part discusses the status quo and problems for the form of unfair terms in consumer contracts. The consumer contract, the consumer, the basic concept of operators, and the general form of unfair terms in consumer contracts and unfair terms of format of their respective characteristics and two distinct. Second, to the application status of the form of unfair terms in consumer contracts are described, and analysis the current regulations of our country, so that the current law does not form a unified standard and the existing provisions of the terms of the format of existing consumer format clauses in the contract problems. Finally the existing provisions are the problem from three aspects, namely the problem of substantive law, administrative regulation and judicial relief. The second part is the format of the consumer contract provisions unfair judgment standard. This part from the angle of comparative law, respectively, the German law, English law, standard judgment about unfair terms and Japanese law Taiwan, regulations and regulations are discussed. The German Civil Code > < article 307-309 lists the "black list", "grey list" and the principle of judging standard as the format clause On the basis of fair judgment; Britain is dedicated to act against all unfair terms provisions, these Provisions shall apply to the format of the terms of unfair judgments; Japanese consumer contract law > < clause 8-10 types of unfair terms of format consumer contracts, a major imbalance in these unfair terms of format contract caused by the rights and obligations of both parties the content validity was negative; Taiwan region of China's "consumer protection law" and supporting the implementation rules of the unfair terms of format concept, judgment standard abstract and so on unfair terms needed to determine the discretion of the judge; and in mainland China mainly a violation of the provisions of the contract law. > section 52,53 of specific provisions and exempt or limit the responsibility of the operator or the obligation to increase consumer and other types of unfair terms, but there is conflict between the provisions of the law The third part for the effectiveness of judgment. Form of unfair terms in consumer contracts. The effectiveness of unfair terms of format judgment to consider the types of contracts parties, rights and obligations of both parties concerned are serious imbalance and other factors to determine the effectiveness. According to the categories will be unfair form clause validity is invalid, revocable two a part of unfair terms of format content in general effectiveness in violation of mandatory provisions of the law or the existence of the interests of consumers may cause significant damage; unfair degree of validity of unfair terms of format content can be revoked did not reach serious degree of unfair or may cause the operator does not fulfill the corresponding obligation to legal effect is negative. The fourth part is the administrative regulation form of unfair terms in consumer contracts. The main points for inclusion and not included in the review before the party Prior approval system includes the filing system of format terms, hearing system and announcement system; and the parties to enter the stage of the contract, the relevant administrative regulation is the main means of administrative punishment level. Relevant issues in China has not yet set up specialized agencies to deal with the terms of the format, and administrative regulations mostly scattered, is not conducive to the protection of consumers, it is very important to the protection of consumers to improve the system of administrative regulation. The fifth part is the form of unfair terms in consumer contracts. Simply discusses the judicial remedy when the number of consumers affected many, judicial relief mode can offer the consumer group litigation and public interest litigation. Public interest litigation has been clear about the civil procedure law the latest revision of < > in the system, but still need to be further defined public interest litigation; group litigation is not regulated, but through the group v. The contrast between the lawsuit and the representative's lawsuit suggests that the group action may have more practical effects on the situation that infringes on many consumers.

【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：D923.8;D923.6

【相似文献】