论保证期间与诉讼时效的适用关系

发布时间：2018-04-15 05:15

本文选题：保证期间 + 诉讼时效　；参考：《外交学院》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：在学界对保证合同的研究中,保证期间与保证债务诉讼时效一直是争议的热点问题。立法也因立法技术及对问题的理解认识等方面的原因,存在冲突和歧义,使理论界与实务界陷于困惑之中。如《中华人民共和国担保法》(以下简称《担保法》)第二十五条二款的规定与2000年9月29日最高人民法院公布的《关于适用〈中华人民共和国担保法若千问题的解释》(以下简称《担保法》司法解释)第三十一条、三十六条的规定相互冲突,其结果会导致司法实践中适用法律的混乱。这类争议的起点往往是保证期间的概念、性质,然后是保证期间与保证债务诉讼时效的衔接关系,最后是主合同与保证债务诉讼时效相互的关联性。这种争论往往将保证期间与保证债务诉讼时效的问题视为一个理论问题,而不是实践操作的问题,或者说认为首先要解决理论问题,然后才能用理论来指导实践。由某种理论得出的制度结论是否符合实际,对现实有何裨益,却很少得到细致论述。保证期间制度与保证债务诉讼时效,需要在司法实践过程不断受到适用和检验,理论探讨可以指导这一过程,但无法取代实践在法律制度发展中发挥的根本作用。本文将从保证期间的性质着手,分析保证期间与保证债务诉讼时效在适用中存在的问题,首先简析保证期间的性质,以保证期间与诉讼时效期间、除斥期间作对比,指出保证期间是独立的期间形态。在此基础上,进而探讨保证起价的起算点与保证债务的诉讼时效。其中,保证期间的起算点又区分一般情形与特殊情形,前者涉及保证债务没有约定保证期间,或者视为没有约定或约定不明的情形,并兼及保证期间与保证债务履行期限;后者则分别涉及保证合同成立时主债务履行期限已经届满、分期履行、预期违约、最高额保证等情形。保证债务的诉讼时效则注意到一般保证与连带保证之别,以及保证债务诉讼时效于主债务诉讼时效的关系。本文将对上述理论问题在实践中是如何解决的做出提炼和总结,通过厘清保证期间和诉讼时效期间的关系,指出立法上的缺陷,并提出修改建议。
[Abstract]:In the research of guarantee contract, the limitation of guarantee period and guarantee debt is always a hot issue.There are also conflicts and ambiguities in legislation because of legislative technology and understanding of problems, which makes the theoretical and practical circles confused.Such as the provisions of Article 25, paragraph 2, of the Law of the people's Republic of China on Guaranty (hereinafter referred to as the "Guaranty Law") and the resolution of the issue concerning the application of the guarantee Law of the people's Republic of China promulgated by the Supreme people's Court on September 29, 2000.Interpretation > (hereinafter referred to as "the Law of Guaranty") Article 31,The provisions of Article 36 conflict with each other, resulting in confusion in the application of the law in judicial practice.The starting point of this kind of dispute is the concept and nature of guarantee period, and then the connection between guarantee period and limitation period of guarantee debt, and finally the correlation between the main contract and the limitation period of guarantee debt.This kind of argument often regards the guarantee period and the guarantee debt limitation as a theoretical problem, not a practical operation problem. In other words, we must solve the theoretical problem first, then we can guide the practice with the theory.Whether the conclusion of the system derived from a certain theory accords with the reality or not is of great benefit to the reality, but it is seldom discussed in detail.The system of guarantee period and the limitation of action of guarantee debt need to be continuously applied and tested in the process of judicial practice. Theoretical discussion can guide this process, but it cannot replace the fundamental role of practice in the development of legal system.This paper will start with the nature of the guarantee period, analyze the problems existing in the application of the guarantee period and the limitation period of the guarantee debt, first of all, briefly analyze the nature of the guarantee period, so as to make a comparison between the guarantee period and the period of limitation of action, except the period of limitation.It is pointed out that the guarantee period is an independent period form.On this basis, the starting point of guarantee and the limitation of guarantee debt are discussed.Among them, the starting point of guarantee period distinguishes between general situation and special case. The former refers to the situation that the guarantee obligation is not agreed upon, or is regarded as not agreed or unclear, and it also refers to the guarantee period and the time limit for the performance of the guaranty debt.The latter involves the expiration of the main debt performance period when the guarantee contract is established, the phased performance, the expected breach of contract, the maximum guarantee and so on.The limitation of surety debt pays attention to the difference between general guarantee and joint guarantee, and the relationship between the limitation of surety obligation and the limitation of main debt action.In this paper, we will refine and summarize the above theoretical problems in practice, clarify the relationship between the guarantee period and the limitation period, point out the defects in the legislation, and put forward some suggestions for amendment.
【学位授予单位】：外交学院
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D923.6;D925.1

【相似文献】