论民事执行瑕疵拍卖的效力及其救济

发布时间：2018-05-13 02:12

本文选题：民事执行瑕疵拍卖 + 效力　；参考：《西南政法大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：民事执行瑕疵拍卖普遍存在于我国现阶段司法实践中，然而，我国的立法对于民事执行瑕疵拍卖的相关问题涉及鲜少，对其效力认定模糊、救济机制的适用范围界定也过于狭窄，《关于人民法院民事执行中拍卖、变卖财产的规定2》中规定了法院有权对拍卖过程进行监督，以及委托相关机构对拍卖财产进行评估，保留拍卖财产的最低价格的权利，但缺乏对民事执行瑕疵拍卖如何救济的相关问题的规定，这一部分在当前实务中处理的方式纷繁复杂，因此为了使民事法律规范对民事执行的规定更加完善和统一当前实务中的处理方式，树立司法权威和保护权利人的合法利益，明确具体的民事执行瑕疵拍卖救济方法显得尤为重要。由于民事执行拍卖法律关系的复杂性，权利不仅可能面临来自权力机关的侵蚀，也可能会遭受到平等民事主体的恶意侵害，这可以从民事执行拍卖存在违法拍卖、不当拍卖等得到印证。因而，在民事执行拍卖程序进行中以及程序结束后，如何实现对权利的救济显得紧迫和必要，实践中多采取的是非正式的信访申诉程序进行救济。这样对关乎当事人及利害关系人权利义务关系的内容无迹可循，势必会造成对当事人和利害关系人权利的侵害，为了维护其合法权益，使得权利不会因为程序上的不完善而受到损害，有必要对我国有关民事执行瑕疵拍卖的相关立法进行填补。本文以对民事执行瑕疵拍卖的内涵界定与具体表现类型为切入点，立足于我国现行的民事诉讼立法框架与理论界关于民事执行瑕疵拍卖效力认定与其所对应救济机制的研究现状，综合域外两大法系对相关理论与制度的研究成果，从而展开对民事执行瑕疵拍卖效力及其救济相关问题的研究，并对我国民事执行瑕疵拍卖救济机制的完善提出了一定的建议。除了引言与结语外，本文主要由五个部分组成：第一部分，对民事执行瑕疵拍卖的内涵及性质做基本的界定。通过对国内有关学者对民事执行瑕疵拍卖相关概念的比较总结及性质的梳理，笔者将民事执行瑕疵拍卖概括性界定为：民事执行拍卖违背法律规定的要件、程序或方法，或者民事执行拍卖行为虽然符合法律规定，但拍卖结果不符合债权人在实体法上的权利关系，，这种民事执行拍卖行为称为民事执行瑕疵拍卖。从而确定了本文所探讨的民事执行瑕疵拍卖的内涵及研究其效力与救济机制所立足的基本视角；第二部分，民事执行瑕疵拍卖的效力认定。执行拍卖在本质上属于公法上的法律行为，其效力实际上也是一种法律的保护或约束，但相较于私法行为在法律保护或约束的内容上则体现更多的公法性及强制力。基于民事执行行为和当事人行为标准，本文从效力角度将民事执行瑕疵拍卖类型化为违法拍卖和不当拍卖。违法执行拍卖是对于执行拍卖程序不合法而导致的拍卖结果上的否定性评价，但是并非所有违法拍卖一定导致无效的拍卖效力，只有在程序严重违反法律时，且必须在法定期间内提出的，才可能被认定为无效。不当执行拍卖是因为不具有实体权利基础，但根据执行拍卖的公法效力，拍卖有效，受侵害权利主体可依拍卖救济程序进行权利救济；第三部分，综合比较研究了域外两大法系关于民事执行救济机制立法的基本情况。通过对域外两大法系几个主要国家和地区的有关立法比较研究以及综合评价，希望对建立我国民事执行瑕疵拍卖救济机制有所裨益，结合我国本土的法律文化传统及立法现状，吸收域外相关制度之合理性方面来不断深化和完善我国瑕疵拍卖救济的理论与实务研究；第四部分，针对我国现行立法和司法实践中的民事执行瑕疵拍卖进行分析研究。本部分主要探讨了我国对瑕疵拍卖救济机制的立法状况及实务操作的基本情况，并将研究视角聚焦于瑕疵拍卖救济机制现有状况之各层面出现的问题，结合国内外有关救济机制的理论成果，分析我国立法中对于民事执行瑕疵拍卖相关配套制度的缺失状况，以及制定一系列瑕疵拍卖救济机制配套措施的正当性与必要性；第五部分，基于前述的研究结论，从违法拍卖与不当拍卖两个层面入手，对完善我国民事执行瑕疵拍卖救济机制提出了相应配套程序的构思与设想，以期对我国民事执行瑕疵拍卖救济机制的纵深研究贡献绵薄之力。
[Abstract]:The defective auction of civil execution is common in the current judicial practice of our country. However, there are few related issues in the legislation of the civil execution defect auction in our country. The identification of its effectiveness is vague and the scope of the application of relief mechanism is too narrow. The provisions of the regulations on the civil execution of the people's court in the civil execution of the auction and the sale of property are stipulated in 2>. The court has the right to supervise the process of the auction, and to entrust the relevant agencies to assess the property of the auction and retain the right to the lowest price of the auction property, but there is a lack of relevant provisions on how to remedy the defective auction of civil execution. This part is complicated in the current practice. It is particularly important that the provisions of the civil enforcement of civil execution are more perfect and unified, and the legal interests of the judicial authority and the protection of the rights of the rights holders are set up, and the specific relief method of the civil execution defect auction is particularly important. It may also suffer from the malicious infringement of the equal civil subject, which can be confirmed from illegal auctions and improper auctions in civil execution auctions. Therefore, it is urgent and necessary to realize the relief of rights in civil execution auction and after the end of the procedure. In practice, the informal petition claims are adopted in practice. There is no trace in the content of the rights and obligations of the parties and the interested parties, which will cause the infringement of the rights of the parties and the interests of the interested parties. In order to safeguard their legitimate rights and interests, the rights will not be damaged because of the imperfect procedures, and it is necessary to make a pat on the civil execution defects in our country. The relevant legislation of the sale is filled. This article is based on the current civil litigation legislative framework and theoretical circles in China on the status of the validity of the civil execution defect auction and the corresponding relief mechanism of the civil execution defect auction. The two legal systems outside the country are based on the relevant theory. The research results of the system and the research on the validity of the civil execution defect auction and the relief related issues are carried out, and some suggestions are made for the improvement of the remedy mechanism of the civil execution defect auction in our country.
In addition to the introduction and conclusion, this paper consists of five parts:
The first part is the basic definition of the connotation and nature of the civil execution defective auction. Through the comparison and summary of the related concepts of civil execution defective auction in China, the author defines the civil execution defect auction as: the civil execution auction violates the legal requirements, procedures or methods, or Although the civil execution auction is in accordance with the law, the result of the auction does not conform to the creditor's right relationship in the substantive law. This kind of civil execution auction is called the civil execution defect auction, which determines the connotation of the civil execution defect auction discussed in this article and the basic perspective of the study of its effectiveness and relief mechanism.
The second part, the validity of the civil execution defective auction. The execution of the auction is essentially a legal act on the public law. Its effectiveness is actually a legal protection or constraint, but it embodies more public law and coercion than the act of private law in the content of legal protection or restraint. According to the standard of behavior, this article makes the civil execution defect auction type into illegal auction and improper auction from the perspective of effectiveness. Illegal execution auction is a negative evaluation on the results of auction resulting from the illegal execution of the auction procedure, but not all illegal auctions will result in invalid auction effect. Only in the procedure, the law violates the law seriously. When, and must be put forward in the legal period, it may be regarded as invalid. Improper execution of the auction is because it does not have the basis of substantive rights, but the auction is valid and the auction is effective. The subject of the infringed right can be remedied in accordance with the relief procedure of the auction.
In the third part, the basic situation of the legislation of the civil execution relief mechanism in the two foreign countries is compared and comparatively studied. Through the comparative study and the comprehensive evaluation of the relevant legislation of several major countries and regions in the two major legal systems abroad, we hope to be beneficial to the establishment of the remedy mechanism of the civil execution defect auction in our country, and combine the law of our country with the law of China. The theoretical and practical research on defective auction relief has been deepened and perfected by the legal culture tradition and legislation status and absorbing the rationality of extraterritorial related systems.
The fourth part analyzes the civil execution defect auction in China's current legislation and judicial practice. This part mainly discusses the basic situation of the legislative and practical operation of the remedy mechanism for the defective auction in China, and focuses on the problems arising from the various aspects of the existing conditions of the remedy mechanism of the defective auction. In accordance with the theoretical results of the relief mechanism at home and abroad, this paper analyzes the lack of relevant supporting systems for civil execution defective auction in China's legislation and the justification and necessity of establishing a series of supporting measures for the remedy mechanism of defective auction.
The fifth part, based on the previous research conclusions, starts with the two aspects of illegal auction and improper auction, and puts forward the conception and tentative plan for improving the remedy mechanism of civil execution defective auction in our country, with a view to contributing to the deep research on the remedy mechanism of civil execution in China.

【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.18

【参考文献】