要件事实理论在买卖合同纠纷诉讼中的应用

发布时间：2018-05-11 10:28

本文选题：民事诉讼 + 要件事实理论　；参考：《华东政法大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：要件事实理论是发端于日本的、近些年为我国民诉学界关注并在一定范围的司法实践中有所应用的指导民事诉讼的方法。其根据民法解释学和法律要件分类理论，判明实体法规范所规定的各类事实，在民事诉讼中究竟由哪一方当事人承担主张、证明责任的理论。要件事实理论引进诉讼庭审中能够指导诉讼场中的两造及法官的行为，明晰各方的权利义务，形成纠纷风险共识，进而有效提升庭审质量，促进法律职业共同体的培养形成。我国法律职业共同体的培养工作长期停滞不前，而日本依托于要件事实理论的统一法曹培养模式将会给中国司法实务界带来些许帮助。本文通过比较分析、规范分析和实证分析等研究方法，对要件事实理论进行系统分析说明。以买卖合同纠纷为切入点，阐释在实务操作中如何具体适用要件事实理论解析案情，展开攻击防御体系。并结合具体庭审实例，发掘当下我国庭审过程中律师与法官思维差异。希望借助于要件事实理论整合律师与法官的法律思维，并提出建议从法律基础教育与统一司法考试等环节强化对于要件事实理论的学习和考察，对接形成统一的法律职业共同体思维方式，以期能对我国法律职业共同体的培养模式创新有所裨益。本文共分为四章：第一章，概述要件事实理论。通过介绍要件事实理论的起源，界定相关概念并阐述其与传统的民事实体法与程序法的关系，明晰要件事实理论的诉讼场方法论地位。以程序法为视角来简述要件事实理论的法理基础，强调要件事实理论以证明责任理论与主张责任理论为基础。第二章，以买卖合同纠纷诉讼为例，具体探讨要件事实理论在司法实务中的应用，简析要件事实理论中的各个环节的展开方式及相应的要件事实检索方法，并对买卖合同纠纷诉讼中常见的标的物交付、标的物风险负担和瑕疵担保责任纠纷类型的适用模式进行分析，列明原被告双方可能展开的攻击防御体系框架。第三章，结合一则实务庭审案例，比对在诉讼过程中的具体裁判结果与要件事实理论分析案件结果之间的差异。借此指明律师与法官操作差异的背后是两者法律思维上的差异。而为了有效提升庭审质量就必须协调两者的思维方式，对接形成法律职业共同体的法律思维。第四章，对完善我国法律职业共同体培养方式提出建议。首先，阐述要件事实理论在诉讼活动中的作用，发掘要件事实理论作为诉讼方法论能够有效对接律师与法官之间的法律思维。其次，，分析了我国当下法律职业共同体无法有效形成的原因。最后建议，从法律基础教育与统一司法考试着手，加强要件事实理论的教育考核，强化法律职业共同体法律思维方式。
[Abstract]:The theory of essential facts is originated in Japan and has been paid attention to by the civil litigation scholars in our country in recent years and has been applied to a certain range of judicial practice to guide civil litigation. According to the theory of hermeneutics of civil law and the classification theory of legal elements, it determines all kinds of facts stipulated in the norms of substantive law, and the theory of which party bears the claim and the burden of proof in civil litigation. The introduction of essential fact theory in litigation court can guide the behavior of the judges in the litigation field, clarify the rights and obligations of all parties, form the consensus of dispute risk, and then effectively improve the quality of trial and promote the formation of legal professional community. The training of the legal professional community in China has been stagnant for a long time, and Japan will bring some help to the judicial practice in China by the unified law training model based on the essential fact theory. Through comparative analysis, normative analysis and empirical analysis, this paper systematically analyzes the theory of essential facts. Taking the dispute of sale and purchase contract as the starting point, this paper explains how to apply the factual theory of the elements in the practical operation to analyze the case and launch the attack defense system. Combining with the concrete trial examples, this paper explores the differences between lawyers and judges in the process of trial in our country. I hope to integrate the legal thinking of lawyers and judges with the help of the theory of facts, and put forward some suggestions to strengthen the study and investigation of the theory of facts from the aspects of basic legal education and unified judicial examination. To form a unified thinking mode of legal professional community in order to benefit the innovation of training mode of legal professional community in our country. This paper is divided into four chapters: The first chapter summarizes the theory of essential facts. By introducing the origin of the theory of essential facts, defining the relevant concepts and expounding its relationship with the traditional civil substantive law and procedural law, the position of litigation field methodology of the theory of essential facts is clarified. From the point of view of procedural law, this paper briefly describes the legal basis of the theory of essential facts, and emphasizes that the theory of essential facts is based on the theory of burden of proof and the theory of claim responsibility. The second chapter, taking the dispute litigation of sale and purchase contract as an example, discusses the application of the essential fact theory in the judicial practice, and briefly analyzes the way of each link in the important element fact theory and the corresponding elements fact retrieval method. This paper also analyzes the applicable models of the subject matter delivery, the subject matter risk burden and the dispute types of defective warranty liability in the litigation of the dispute of sale and purchase contract, and lists the framework of the attack defense system that may be launched by both the original defendant and the original defendant. The third chapter, combining a practical trial case, compares the difference between the specific adjudication result and the fact theory in the litigation process. Therefore, the difference of legal thinking between lawyers and judges is behind the differences between them. In order to effectively improve the quality of trial, we must coordinate their thinking mode and form the legal thinking of legal professional community. The fourth chapter, to perfect our country legal profession community training way puts forward the proposal. First of all, it expounds the role of the theory of essential facts in litigation activities, and explores that the theory of facts of elements, as a methodology of litigation, can effectively connect the legal thinking between lawyers and judges. Secondly, it analyzes the reasons why the legal professional community can not be formed effectively. Finally, it is suggested that starting from the basic law education and the unified judicial examination, we should strengthen the educational examination of the essential facts theory and strengthen the legal thinking mode of the legal professional community.
【学位授予单位】：华东政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.1;D923.6

【相似文献】