论不真正连带责任独立性的缺失——兼评新制定的《侵权责任法》相关规定

发布时间：2018-04-24 20:41

本文选题：不真正连带责任 + 连带责任　；参考：《学术论坛》2011年05期

【摘要】：不真正连带责任正是德国理论为了维护连带责任的逻辑自洽而产生的概念,我国理论得以继受。但法定不真正连带责任有值得反思的地方:立法规定不统一,不能从整体上把握连带责任情形,概念容易产生歧义。《侵权责任法》的一般规定并未提及不真正连带责任应属妥当选择,《侵权责任法》中某些关于不真正连带责任的规定与传统理论、商法价值不完全相符,划分依据尚欠明晰。由于连带责任外延的扩张能容纳法定不真正连带责任,区分标准不再泾渭分明,法定不真正连带责任可以融入连带责任中,应加强债务人内部责任分配的研究。对于广义请求权竞合的情形可以通过相应的实体法满足债权人的诉讼请求,学说应更侧重程序法。这样不仅可以较全面把握连带责任的适用情形,还能更有效保护债权人利益。
[Abstract]:Untrue joint liability is the concept of German theory in order to maintain the logical consistency of joint and several liability, our theory has been accepted. But the legal untrue joint and several liability is worthy of reflection: the legislative provisions are not uniform, the joint and several liability can not be grasped as a whole. The general provisions of the Tort liability Law do not mention that untrue joint and several liability should be an appropriate choice, and some provisions on untrue joint and several liability in Tort liability Law do not fully conform to the traditional theory and the value of commercial law. The basis for division is still unclear. Since the extension of joint and several liability can accommodate the legal unreal joint and several liability, the distinguishing standard is no longer clear, the legal unreal joint and several liability can be incorporated into the joint and several liability, the study of the internal liability distribution of the debtor should be strengthened. In the case of generalized concurrence of claim rights, creditors' claims can be satisfied by corresponding substantive law, so the doctrine should pay more attention to procedural law. In this way, we can not only comprehensively grasp the application of joint and several liability, but also more effectively protect the interests of creditors.
【作者单位】：西南大学法学院;
【基金】：中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助(SWU1009025) 西南大学科研基金资助项目(SWU10343)的阶段性成果
【分类号】：D923

【参考文献】