股权转让合同解除权的司法判断与法理研究

发布时间：2018-04-04 21:40

本文选题：股权转让合同　切入点：解除权　出处：《中国法学》2017年02期

【摘要】：《合同法》第174条并未明确对其他有偿合同所参照的买卖合同有关规定的范围,理论界和实务部门对股权转让合同是否能直接参照买卖合同相关规定都存在争议。通过对第67号指导案例以及同类股权转让案件的分析,可以总结出该类案件的法律适用规则:首先,作为特殊标的物,股权的移转和交付方式决定了其转让合同不应当适用《合同法》第167条规定的分期付款解除权;其次,在适用其他法定解除权时,应当从商事交易的特殊性角度出发,从严把握解除权的适用条件。由于商法与民法体系之间的价值取向各有侧重,商法更偏重效率价值以及外观主义而民法更偏重追求当事人间的公平正义,导致了同一行为的内外部价值评价出现矛盾,因此,从行为本身的属性来判断异类规则的适用性和适用程度是更为合理的解决方式。
[Abstract]:Article 174 of the contract Law does not clearly define the scope of the relevant provisions of the contract of sale referred to in other paid contracts, and there is a dispute in the theoretical and practical sectors as to whether the contract of transfer of shares can directly refer to the relevant provisions of the contract of sale and purchase.Through the analysis of the guiding case No. 67 and the case of similar equity transfer, we can conclude the applicable rules of the law of this kind of cases: first, as a special subject matter,The transfer and delivery of equity determines that the transfer contract should not apply the right to release the installment payment as stipulated in Article 167 of the contract Law; secondly, when applying other statutory dissolution rights, it should proceed from the perspective of the particularity of the commercial transaction.Strictly grasp the applicable conditions of the right of rescission.Because the value orientation between commercial law and civil law system has its own emphasis, commercial law pays more attention to efficiency value and appearance doctrine, and civil law pays more attention to the pursuit of fairness and justice between the parties, which leads to the contradiction between internal and external value evaluation of the same behavior.It is more reasonable to judge the applicability and applicability of the rule from the nature of the behavior itself.
【作者单位】：北京外国语大学法学院;
【分类号】：D923.6

【相似文献】