违约金及其调整制度研究

发布时间：2018-02-22 21:24

本文关键词： 违约金补偿性违约金惩罚性违约金违约金调整机制　出处：《山东大学》2017年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：违约金制度是合同法中的一项基本制度,是一种重要的违约责任的承担方式,在合同实务中应用极为广泛。在当下市场交易日益频繁与复杂的背景下,违约金作为督促当事人履行合同、惩罚违约方并补偿守约方的一项重要设计,为市场经济的发展做出了重要的贡献。但在司法实务中,由于合同相对人地位的优劣、审慎程度的不同以及竞争导致的冒险行为,导致在实务中,合同违约金条款千差万别。鉴于此,合同法设置了违约金调整制度以实现合同当事人之间的相对公平,允许当事人事后请求法院或者仲裁机构对过分不合理的违约金进行调整。尽管如此,这一制度在实务上仍有诸多问题使人困惑,尤其是违约金的性质及其具体适用等方面。在实务中,有关违约金制度的现行规定不利于法官进行裁量。关于违约金调整制度,有关举证责任的分配以及法官释明权行使的条件和范围,还需要进一步明确。基于违约金制度的上述理论和实务方面的问题,笔者在查阅相关资料的基础上,从审判实务出发,对违约金制度进行分析。本文正文分为四部分。第一部分对违约金制度进行概述,主要分析违约金制度的内涵、性质以及制度价值。依据违约金的性质,违约金可分为补偿性违约金与惩罚性违约金,在区分违约金性质的基础上对不同性质违约金的价值分别进行了阐述。对违约金制度进行域外考察,分析域外违约金制度的立法例,以期为我国违约金制度的完善寻求启发。第二部分叙述我国违约金制度的现状,首先,叙述我国违约金制度的现行法律依据,对目前与违约金性质、调整制度和违约金适用相关的法条整合分析。在对法律依据综合研究的基础上,着重分析我国违约金制度在审判实务中存在的不足。其次,违约金调整制度不完善,具体包括启动的条件和期限不明确、判断的标准原则化、法官是否行使释明权不明确;另外,惩罚性违约金制度缺失,在实践中对惩罚性违约金并没有全盘否定,但是,具体到案件审理中法院仍然不会完全按照当事人在合同中的约定来审理认定惩罚性违约金。第三部分主要对我国违约金制度的完善提出建议。在综合分析我国违约金制度现状的基础上,首先从违约金调整制度的启动条件和期限、举证责任的分配及法官释明权行使的范围和及条件三个方面提出完善建议。其次,针对惩罚性违约金的适用条件及惩罚性违约金与定金的关系,对惩罚性违约金的构建提出完善建议。第四部分是分析在司法实践中如何对违约金数额进行调整。违约金数额的调整包括调高和调低,实践中当事人要求对违约金数额降低的案例更为多见,笔者对实践中经常出现的、是否可以影响违约金数额调整的几个因素进行整理,并结合相关案例进行分析,以期对实践有一定的指导价值。
[Abstract]:The system of liquidated damages is a basic system in contract law and an important way to assume liability for breach of contract, which is widely used in contract practice. As an important design to urge the parties to fulfill the contract, punish the breaching party and compensate the compliance party, the liquidated damages have made an important contribution to the development of the market economy. However, in judicial practice, due to the advantages and disadvantages of the relative status of the contract, Due to the different degree of prudence and the risky behavior caused by competition, there are many different terms in practice. In view of this, the contract law has set up a system to adjust the penalty for breach of contract in order to realize the relative fairness between the parties to the contract. The parties are allowed to ask the court or the arbitration institution to adjust the excessive and unreasonable liquidated damages afterwards. However, there are still many practical problems in the system that make people confused. In particular, the nature of liquidated damages and their specific application. In practice, the current provisions on the system of liquidated damages are not conducive to the discretion of judges. With regard to the distribution of the burden of proof and the conditions and scope of the exercise of the judge's right of interpretation, it needs further clarification. Based on the above theoretical and practical aspects of the system of liquidated damages, the author proceeds from the trial practice on the basis of consulting relevant information. The text of this paper is divided into four parts. The first part summarizes the system of liquidated damages, mainly analyzes the connotation, nature and value of the system. The liquidated damages can be divided into compensatory liquidated damages and punitive liquidated damages. On the basis of distinguishing the nature of the liquidated damages, the value of the liquidated damages of different nature is expounded respectively. This paper analyzes the legislative examples of the system of extra-territorial liquidated damages in order to seek inspiration for the perfection of the system of liquidated damages in China. The second part describes the present situation of the system of liquidated damages in China, first of all, describes the current legal basis of the system of liquidated damages in China. On the basis of the comprehensive study of the legal basis, the author analyzes the deficiency of the system of liquidated damages in the trial practice. The adjustment system of penalty for breach of contract is not perfect, including the condition and time limit of starting is not clear, the criterion of judgment is principle, and whether the judge exercises the right of interpretation is not clear; in addition, the system of punitive penalty for breach of contract is not clear. In practice, the punitive penalty is not completely denied, but, The court will still not judge the punitive liquidated damages in accordance with the agreement of the parties in the contract. The third part mainly puts forward some suggestions for the perfection of the system of liquidated damages in our country. On the basis of the present situation of the Jokin system, First of all, some suggestions are put forward from three aspects: the starting condition and time limit of the adjustment system of liquidated damages, the distribution of the burden of proof and the scope and conditions of the exercise of the judge's right of interpretation. According to the applicable conditions of punitive liquidated damages and the relationship between punitive liquidated damages and deposit, Part 4th is to analyze how to adjust the amount of liquidated damages in judicial practice. In practice, there are more cases where the amount of liquidated damages is reduced. The author collates several factors that can affect the adjustment of the amount of liquidated damages in practice, and analyzes them in combination with relevant cases. With a view to practice has certain guiding value.
【学位授予单位】：山东大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D923.6

【相似文献】