债权人代位权客体范围研究
发布时间:2018-06-19 16:59
本文选题:债权人代位权客体 + 债权人代位权客体要件 ; 参考:《西南政法大学》2013年硕士论文
【摘要】:关于债权人代位权客体范围,学者们普遍认为我国的债权人代位权制度中对于代位权客体的规定——以金钱给付为内容的债权过于狭窄,但各家观点又没有统一,颇有争议:小到认为应当扩展到具有财产价值的内容的债权,大到认为不应限制于“债权”,物权、诉权等也应纳入代位权客体的范围。这一论题的研究,对债权人代位权制度的完善具有理论和实践双重意义,值得深究。本文主要才用比较法、一般原理分析法、案例分析法研究。全文共分为四个部分: 一、债权人代位权客体概述。这部分主要阐明,本文所论述的债权人代位权客体是指,代位权所行使的对象,实质是妨碍债权实现的债务人的权利。 二、债权人代位权客体的要件。这部分通过对债权人代位权客体要件分析,得出债权人代位权客体要件包括:债务人的权利、有益于责任财产、现有权利、非专属于债务人本身的权利四要件。“债务人的权利”,用以区分债权人代位权与担保追讨权及保险代位权等其他代位性质的权利;“有益于责任财产”,是相对于我国《合同法解释(一)》规定的“以金钱为给付”这一要件而言的。“以金钱为给付”已经超出了财产性质的要求,不仅要求为财产性质的权利,还进一步规定了其给付内容的形式。本文认为不应为了精简诉讼程序而做此限制;“现有权利”,要求可代位行使的权利必须是债务人现有的权利,如果该权利属于一种期待权或作为一种权能,如物之使用、收益、处分等,则不得代位行使。另外,有学者将“合法权利”和“现有权利”作为两个要件分别列出。笔者认为未必要将“合法权利”作为单独的要件列出,归纳到“现有权利”这一要件中更为恰当;“非专属于债权人本身”,表明专属于债务人本身的权利不能作为债权人代位权客体,并且着重指出,债权的让与性或继承性受到法定或意定的限制的情形原则上不导出其不可代位性。 三、债权人代位权客体范围讨论。这部分主要通过对各项实体权利的分析,从而得出是否应纳入到债权人代位权客体范围内,并得出结论:人身权、知识产权和继承权不符合债权人代位权客体要件应予排除在该范围之外。合同债权中,以合同标的为划分标准的合同债权中,以非金钱财产为给付为标的的债权应纳入到代位权客体范围;从合同内容为划分标准的合同债权中,赠与请求权应排除;将解除权、选择权等与合同债权相关的形成权也纳入到该客体范围。同时,对于合同法解释中的“债权”应解释为包括因无因管理、不当得利、侵权引起的债权,其中侵权债权中,因侵犯人身权利而引起的债权不应纳入到这一客体范围。在物权中,所有权和用益物权一般情况下不能被代位,但是一些特殊的债权人对妨碍其债权实现的所有权或用益物权具有代位权;担保物权一般情况下不能被代位,但是若担保物权所担保的债权被代位时担保物权可以同时被代位。 四、我国债权人代位权客体范围限制的原因分析及未来立法建议。分析我国代位权客体范围限制的原因分析并提出了完善建议。 本文的创新点在于,结合前人观点,对债权人代位权客体要件、客体范围中有争议的问题提出了自己的观点,如对“现有权利”的理解,物权可否成为代位权问题等。
[Abstract]:With regard to the object scope of creditor ' s subrogation , scholars generally agree that the creditor ' s subrogation in our country is too narrow for the object of subrogation . However , it is controversial that it should be extended to the scope of the object of subrogation . The study of this topic is of great significance to the perfection of creditor ' s subrogation system .
The object of creditor ' s subrogation is the object of subrogation , which is essentially the debtor ' s right to hinder the realization of creditor ' s rights .
The article analyses the object of creditor ' s subrogation right , and concludes that the object of creditor ' s subrogation includes : the debtor ' s rights , the benefit to the property of duty , the existing right , the non - exclusive right of the debtor itself , and the debtor ' s right , which is used to distinguish the creditor ' s right of subrogation and the right to recover the right of recovery and the right of subrogation .
The property of " beneficial responsibility " is relative to the requirement of " monetary benefit " in the interpretation of Chinese contract law ( 1 ) . " money - based payment " is beyond the property of property , not only the right of property , but also the form of its benefits . This article holds that this limitation should not be done to streamline the proceedings ;
The author thinks that " legal right " and " existing right " are listed separately .
" The non - exclusive creditor itself " indicates that the rights exclusively owned by the debtor cannot be the object of the creditor ' s subrogation , and it is stressed that the nature of the creditor ' s rights and the nature or inheritance of the creditor ' s rights are subject to the statutory or implied limitation , in principle , the non - substitutability of the creditor ' s rights is not derived .
Third , the scope of creditor ' s subrogation object is discussed . This part mainly derives from the analysis of the entity ' s rights and concludes that it should be included in the object of creditor ' s subrogation , and conclude that the right of person , intellectual property and inheritance do not conform to the object of creditor ' s subrogation .
In the contract creditor ' s right that the contract content is divided into the standard , the gift and the right of request should be ruled out ;
At the same time , the creditor ' s right in the interpretation of contract law should be interpreted as including the creditor ' s rights arising from the absence of management , unjust enrichment and torts , where the creditor ' s rights arising from the infringement of personal rights should not be included in the scope of the object . In the real right , the ownership and the usufruct can not be substituted , but some special creditors have the subrogation right to obstruct the realization of their rights or to use the usufruct .
The security rem cannot be substituted in general , but the security right may be substituted at the same time if the secured creditor ' s right is substituted .
The article analyzes the reasons of the limitation of the object scope of subrogation in our country and puts forward some suggestions for improvement .
The innovation point of this paper is that , in combination with the former ' s viewpoint , the object conditions of creditor ' s subrogation and the dispute in object range are put forward , such as the understanding of " the existing rights " , the possibility of the right of rem as subrogation , etc .
【学位授予单位】:西南政法大学
【学位级别】:硕士
【学位授予年份】:2013
【分类号】:D923.3
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 曾祥生;;论解除权之行使[J];法学评论;2010年02期
2 原琳;;赠与合同的性质:诺成性抑或实践性[J];法制与社会;2009年16期
3 黄璞虑;;论无因管理及其与侵权行为之界分[J];法制与社会;2010年01期
4 赵海洋;张洁;;论合同约定解除权的行使[J];公民与法(法学);2011年01期
5 陈朝玉;陈国银;;权利概念的多维性评析[J];黑龙江史志;2010年11期
6 张潜伟;论受领迟延[J];平原大学学报;2005年01期
7 孙冬梅;;合同违约中的违约金与定金[J];商丘职业技术学院学报;2012年01期
8 唐正平;继承权的性质[J];湖南税务高等专科学校学报;2004年02期
9 赵庆年;;浅议违约责任的若干问题[J];企业导报;2011年01期
10 唐烈英;;代位权客体探讨[J];西南政法大学学报;2002年01期
,本文编号:2040561
本文链接:https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/zhishichanquanfa/2040561.html