国际私法之实体法方法探析

发布时间：2018-09-18 08:06

【摘要】：国际私法历史中，法律冲突问题的解决途径主要有三种方法，即单边主义、多边主义以及实体法方法。这三种方法各具特色，在国际私法发展的各个时期为解决法律冲突发挥着不同的作用。实体法方法是公认的，解决法律冲突最早的方法，然而，它受到的重视程度远不及单边主义方法和多边主义方法。学术研究上，冲突法学者醉心于传统冲突法方法；审判实践中，实体法方法也得不到法官的垂青。究其缘由，原因种种。然而，实体法方法仍具有许多理论与实践的研究价值。本文从对比的角度，对实体法方法进行研究。引言部分主要是从两个方面列举国内外学者有关于实体法方法内容的探讨，以及他们之间观点的异同，从客观角度对其观点进行评价，分析其中存在的不足之处。第一部分从时间维度，对三种解决法律冲突的方法分别进行论述，探讨国际私法的三种方法的历史逻辑，突出其在国际私法发展史上所起到的重要作用以及其地位。该部分重点论述实体法方法早期的几种表现主要形式，并用发展的观点看待实体法方法在当代的复兴。第二部分旨在阐述实体法方法存在的合理性。通过与单边主义和多边主义的比较，说明两种冲突法方法的不足以及实体法方法相比之下的优点，并从主权角度，阐释实体法方法与国家的关系以及如何实现二者的良好互动。第三部分承接第二部分，在指出传统冲突法方法的不足之处后，采用实体法方法对其进行补充和完善。分别介绍了美国近代的“冲突法革命”以及欧洲主要国家的冲突法改良道路，论证了对待传统冲突法方法的两种不同态度，即抛弃规则或者改良规则。实体法方法就是在与冲突法方法的不断抗争中发展起来，经由此，论证当代国际私法方法的三足鼎立的局面。第四部分把实体法方法与我国的国内理论实践结合起来。首先介绍了我国目前解决涉外民商事纠纷的法律及方法；再次，分析了我国目前的研究现状以及审判实践，发现其存在的缺陷；最后，在全球化大背景下，提出应重视实体法方法在我国学术理论究以及审判实践中的研究与运用，论证实体法方法在我国特殊的国情下推行的可行性，为我国多法域法律冲突解决提供新的出路。当代国际私法的方法论已呈现出多元化的发展趋势。三种对于解决涉外民商事纠纷问题都起到了至关重要的作用，究竟采用哪种方法更好，取决于实践发展的需要。但是，可以肯定的是，任何一种方法，只要它有助于法律冲突的解决，，都应当受到我们的欢迎。
[Abstract]:In the history of private international law, there are three ways to solve the conflict of laws: unilateralism, multilateralism and substantive law. These three methods have their own characteristics and play different roles in resolving conflicts of law in each period of the development of private international law. The substantive law method is recognized as the earliest way to solve the conflict of laws. However, it receives far less attention than the unilateralism method and the multilateralism method. In academic research, conflict law scholars are obsessed with the traditional conflict law method, and the substantive law method is not favored by the judge in the trial practice. There are many reasons for this. However, the method of substantive law still has a lot of theoretical and practical research value. In this paper, the method of substantive law is studied from the point of view of comparison. In the foreword part, the author enumerates the contents of substantive law methods from two aspects, and the similarities and differences between them, evaluates their viewpoints from an objective angle, and analyzes their shortcomings. The first part discusses the three methods of resolving the conflict of laws from the time dimension, discusses the historical logic of the three methods of private international law, and highlights the important role and status of the three methods in the history of private international law. This part focuses on the main forms of the early substantive law method, and views the revival of the substantive law method in the contemporary era from the point of view of development. The second part aims to expound the rationality of the existence of substantive law method. By comparing with unilateralism and multilateralism, this paper explains the shortcomings of the two methods of conflict of laws and the advantages of the substantive law methods, and from the perspective of sovereignty, explains the relationship between the substantive law method and the state and how to realize the good interaction between the two methods. The third part carries on the second part, after pointing out the deficiency of the traditional conflict law method, it uses the substantive law method to supplement and perfect it. This paper introduces the "conflict of laws revolution" in modern America and the ways to improve the conflict law of the major European countries, and demonstrates two different attitudes to the traditional conflict law methods, that is, jettisoning rules or improving rules. The method of substantive law is developed in the constant struggle with the method of conflict of laws. The fourth part combines the method of substantive law with the domestic theory and practice of our country. First of all, it introduces the current law and method of solving civil and commercial disputes involving foreign affairs in our country; thirdly, it analyzes the current research situation and trial practice of our country, and finds out its defects; finally, under the background of globalization, This paper puts forward that we should pay attention to the research and application of substantive law method in academic theory and trial practice in our country, demonstrate the feasibility of carrying out substantive law method under the special national conditions of our country, and provide a new way to resolve the conflict of law in many jurisdictions of our country. The methodology of contemporary private international law has shown a diversified development trend. The three methods play an important role in solving the civil and commercial disputes involving foreign countries, which method is better depends on the needs of the development of practice. But, to be sure, any approach, as long as it contributes to the resolution of conflicts of laws, should be welcomed.
【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】：D997

【参考文献】