“跳单”的认定及其法律后果

发布时间：2018-04-09 14:56

本文选题：跳单　切入点：认定标准　出处：《湘潭大学》2013年硕士论文

【摘要】：在日益繁荣的房地产中介服务中，居间合同“跳单”现象越来越频繁。但由于我国目前无法律规范具体规定跳单的认定等相关内容，各地法院在审查跳单纠纷案件中，未形成相对统一的认定标准。直到2011年最高院指导案例的发布，跳单的认定标准才略有成形，但对此仍然存在不同观点。目前学界关于跳单认定标准的几种观点或过于严苛和狭窄，或存在逻辑瑕疵。根据德国立法和法经济学的观点，跳单的认定标准不应考虑委托人的主观恶意，从以下四个方面判断即可：（1）居间合同成立，为跳单认定的起点。（2）居间人履行了居间义务，为跳单认定的基础条件。（3）委托人存在“绕开”居间人与第三人交易的行为，为跳单认定的重要条件。（4）居间人的居间行为与委托人最终缔约具有原因性，为跳单认定的核心要素。反跳单条款的效力涉及到对跳单行为法律后果的判定。反跳单格式条款的有效或无效不应简单判定，而应当根据约定的具体情形来认定。当居间人履行了居间义务、居间人的居间行为与委托人成功缔约具有原因性时，居间人享有报酬请求权；在居间人不存在可归责的过错等情况下，不受促成缔约的合同无效、可撤销等影响。当反跳单条款有效且委托人存在跳单行为时，居间人享有违约赔偿请求权，，不受委托人主观态度的影响。
[Abstract]:In the increasingly prosperous real estate intermediary services, intermediary contract "jump" phenomenon more and more frequent.However, due to the fact that there is no legal norm in our country to specify the cognizance of skipping, there is no relatively uniform standard of confirmation in the examination of dispute cases of skipping by local courts.Until the release of the 2011 Supreme Court guidance case, the criteria for determining jump orders took shape slightly, but there are still different views on this.At present, there are some opinions about the criterion of jump-order recognition, which are too strict and narrow, or have logic flaws.According to the viewpoint of German legislation and law and economics, the criteria for determining jump order should not consider the subjective malice of the client. It can be judged from the following four aspects: 1) the establishment of the intermediary contract, which is the starting point for the confirmation of the jump order. 2) the intermediary person has fulfilled the intermediary obligation.The behavior of "circumventing" the transaction between the intermediary and the third party is the important condition for the confirmation of the jump order. 4) the intermediary behavior of the broker and the final contracting of the principal have the cause and are the core elements of the confirmation of the hopping order.The effectiveness of the reverse-jump clause involves the determination of the legal consequences of the skip act.The validity or invalidation of a rebound form clause should not be determined simply, but according to the agreed circumstances.When the intermediary has fulfilled the intermediary obligation, the intermediary has the right of claim for compensation when the intermediary acts have the reason for the successful conclusion of the contract with the principal, and if the intermediary does not have the fault of imputability, the contract that facilitated the conclusion of the contract is invalid,Revocable, etc.When the backjumper clause is effective and the trustor has the behavior of skipping, the intermediary has the right to claim for compensation for breach of contract, which is not affected by the principal's subjective attitude.
【学位授予单位】：湘潭大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：D923

【参考文献】