我国遗嘱自由限制研究

发布时间：2018-01-09 03:00

本文关键词：我国遗嘱自由限制研究　出处：《吉林大学》2014年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：遗嘱自由，是指遗嘱人遵照自己的意愿于生前订立遗嘱自由处分其个人财产的自由。遗嘱自由原则作为《继承法》的重要原则之一，与意思自治原则一样体现了对公民私人所有权的保护和对个人意志的尊重，闪耀着现代私法的光辉，象征着人类文明的演进。然而任何自由都是有限度的，遗嘱自由也不例外。因为权利的过度扩张总是伴随着权利的滥用，人的本性决定了人在行为时往往从个人的好恶、偏爱出发，极易受感情因素的影响而做出一些损害国家、社会和其他家庭成员利益的行为，这种现象仅仅依靠道德的约束是无法避免的，因此法律在尊重遗嘱自由的同时应当人为地设置一道安全屏障，使遗嘱人在屏障范围内合理地行使其遗嘱自由，这样既能最大限度的发挥其意思自治又不损害他人的利益。世界各国在对待遗嘱自由限制的问题上，都持肯定的态度，在尊重遗嘱自由的同时，都对遗嘱自由实行了一定的限制，这些限制要受到伦理道德、婚姻家制等因素的影响。各国法律都较为原则性的规定遗嘱行为不得与法律规定相抵触、不得违反社会的公共秩序和善良风俗，除此之外各国还根据自身的国情制定了符合自身社会发展状况的制度。在遗嘱自由限制的问题上，大陆法系国家在承袭罗马法的基础上构建现代特留份制度；英美法系国家主要通过适当抚养费制度、寡妇产、鳏夫产、宅院特留份等制度以平衡遗嘱自由和其他社会利益之间的关系。这些制度虽然在具体规定上有所差异，，但都在一定程度上有效地平衡了遗嘱自由和其他利益之间的关系。我国的遗嘱自由限制立法主要体现在《中华人民共和国继承法》第19条、第28条以及《关于贯彻执行中华人民共和国继承法若干问题的意见》第37条、第45条和第61条中。理论界通常将上述规定称为必留份制度，必留份制度在微观上为遗嘱自由划出了“禁区”。除此之外《中华人民共和国民法通则》第7条规定的“公序良俗”原则在宏观上为遗嘱自由原则划定了“边界”。宏观原则和微观规定相互配合，形成了我国的遗嘱自由限制立法。然而我国的必留份制度自身存在着诸多缺陷，很多时候这些缺陷使其遗嘱自由限制的目的落空。本文概括总结了我国立法所存在的缺陷，具体包括：（1）保护范围过窄致使需要保护的继承人的利益得不到保护。（2）相关规定体例安排不合理以致遗嘱自由限制得不到合理的重视。（3）仅有的必留份规定流于形式、不易操作等等。这些缺陷使得我国的遗嘱自由限制立法无法发挥其应有的作用，我国社会上滥用遗嘱自由的情况时有发生。我国的遗嘱自由限制立法如此宽松绝不是出于对遗嘱自由的追求，而是由当时特定的政治、经济、社会背景下立法上的疏忽导致的。我国《继承法》颁布至今已三十余年，法律的滞后性使得当时的制度无法有效地规制现今的行为。目前，我国正值《民法典》制定之际，未来《民法典》继承法编必将做出相关规定为遗嘱自由找到恰当的底线。针对我国遗嘱自由限制的立法完善，本文提出以下几方面建议：（1）完善我国必留份制度。（2）构建配偶特留份制度。（3）排除健康成年子女的利益保护。
[Abstract]:The freedom of Testament, refers to the testator comply with their wishes on living wills freedom to dispose of their personal property. The freedom of testament freedom principle as "one of the important principles of inheritance law", and the principle of autonomy as embodies the protection of citizens' private ownership and respect for the will of the individual, shining bright symbol of modern private law, with the evolution of human civilization. But any freedom is limited, the freedom of testament is no exception. Because of the excessive expansion of rights is always accompanied by the abuse of rights, determines the nature of man in behavior often from personal preference, preference of vulnerable to emotional factors and make some damage to the country. Other family members and social interests, is unable to avoid this phenomenon only rely on the moral constraints, so the law in respect of the testamentary freedom should also be artificially set a Daoan The full screen barrier enables the testator to exercise its testamentary freedom within the scope of the barrier, so that it can not only maximize its autonomy but also do no harm to the interests of others.
All the countries in the world towards the limitation of testamentary freedom issues, positive attitude, in respect of the testamentary freedom of testamentary freedom at the same time, imposed certain restrictions, these restrictions should be ethical and moral factors, marriage and family system. The law stipulated the principle will not act with legal provisions. Conflict, shall not violate the social public order and good customs, in addition to the countries according to their own national conditions to develop in line with their own development and social system. The limitation of testamentary freedom on the issue of civil law countries to build a modern legitim system based on inherited Rome law; common law countries mainly through appropriate compensation fee system, widowed and widower, the relationship between house legitim system to balance between the freedom of Testament and other social interests. Although these systems differ in specific provisions But, to a certain extent, it effectively balances the relationship between the freedom of the will and other interests.
Limitation of testamentary freedom legislation in China is mainly reflected in the inheritance law > nineteenth < < People's Republic of China, twenty-eighth and thirty-seventh on the implementation of opinions on issues of People's Republic of China's law of inheritance, forty-fifth and sixty-first. The theoretical circle usually referred to as the rules will leave a system, will leave a system at the micro level is the freedom of testament out of the "forbidden area". In addition < People's Republic of China > seventh general principles of the civil law stipulates that the principle of public order and good custom at the macro level to the principle of testamentary freedom to define "boundary". The principle of macro and micro regulation with each other, forming a restriction of freedom of testament legislation in China. However, China will remain the system itself has many defects, many of these defects make the limitation of testamentary freedom to fail. This paper summarized the defects of existing legislation including: (1) the protection of fan The need to protect the surrounding narrow heir's interests are not protected. (2) the relevant provisions of style arrangements are not reasonable that the restriction of a free will without reasonable attention. (3) only must leave copies of formal rules, easy to operate and so on. These defects will make our self limited by legislation can not play its due role in our society, the abuse of the freedom of the will occur.
Limitation of testamentary freedom legislation in China is not so loose for the freedom to pursue, but by the time the specific political, economic, neglect of legislation on social background. China's inheritance law has been promulgated < > thirty years, legal lag time makes the behavior of system can not effectively regulate the current at present, our country is in the enactment of the Civil Code > < < >, the future civil code inheritance law will make the relevant provisions for free will find the right bottom line. For perfecting the restriction of freedom of testament legislation, this paper puts forward the following suggestions: (1) on perfecting necessary heirship system in China. (2) construction of spouse legitim system. (3) out of the protection of the interests of healthy adult children.

【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D923.5

【参考文献】