关于合同解释的案例研究

发布时间：2018-04-09 11:46

本文选题：同案不同判　切入点：合同解释　出处：《兰州大学》2012年硕士论文

【摘要】：南京苏高专利事务所诉南京巨胜科技有限公司委托合同纠纷案经过了一审、二审、再审。在我国经济、文化发达的东部地区,法官素质相对较高,却依然出现了“对同样的事实,不同的法官或合议庭审理,结果却出现了大相径庭的判决”。在对上述案例的研究中发现：合同解释难造成了该同案不同判现象的产生。合同纠纷诉讼往往离不开“对有争议内容的理解和确认”,即“合同解释”。合同解释的研究对合同纠纷相关案件的解决有着重要的现实意义。实务当中的法律问题往往是一个综合体,和心理学、经济学等各跨学科、各跨领域的相关研究有着千丝万缕的联系。本案例分析将以“心理认知偏见”和“法律实践与成本耗费的关系”这两个角度从合同纠纷的产生入手,进行合同解释的案例研究：首先,无论是当事人还是法官,无论是合同纠纷的产生和法官对案件事实的认定都离不开对合同条款的心理认知,而人在心理认知的过程中往往存在着认知偏见；其次,商事合同是一种交易关系,交易成本越低则交易所追逐的利益也就越丰厚,交易成本制约了当事人所订立的合同的质量,制约了当事人的举证能力。同时司法成本也同样制约着法庭审判的质量。理想状态下法官必须尽可能多的认识到案件事实的全貌,越“精确”越有可能作出令当事人各方都信服的判决。然而实务当中“精确”意味着更大的成本耗费和法官的自身素质要求。法官自身的素质水平也离不开成本的制约。本文重点关注以下几个问题：法官应当如何避免自己的认知偏见对案件审理造成影响；司法成本与事实认定的精确度之间应当如何取舍；我国《合同法》关于合同解释相关问题的规定采用的是什么样的理论基础；在大陆法系由客观主义合同解释转向主观主义合同解释的潮流中,我国《合同法》采取的合同解释理论基础是否已经过时,落后于生产力发展,从而造成了同案不同判的出现。对上述问题的研究有利于在一定程度上减少同案不同判的出现,维护司法公信力。
[Abstract]:Nanjing Sugao Patent Office v. Nanjing Jusheng Science and Technology Co., Ltd. after the first instance, second instance, retrial.In the economic and cultural developed eastern region of our country, the quality of judges is relatively high, but still appeared "the same facts, different judges or collegiate bench hearing, but the result of a very different judgment".In the study of the above cases, it is found that the difficult interpretation of the contract causes the phenomenon of different judgments in the same case.Contract dispute litigation is often inseparable from "understanding and confirming the disputed content", that is, "contract interpretation".The study of contract interpretation is of great practical significance to the settlement of contract disputes.In practice, the legal problem is often a synthesis, and psychology, economics and other interdisciplinary, cross-related research has inextricably linked.This case study will start with the emergence of contract disputes from the perspectives of "psychological cognitive bias" and "the relationship between legal practice and cost cost". First of all, whether the parties concerned or the judge, the case study will be carried out.The lower the transaction cost, the richer the benefit the exchange pursues. The transaction cost restricts the quality of the contract concluded by the parties, and restricts the party's ability to prove.At the same time, judicial costs also restrict the quality of court trials.Ideally, the judge must realize as much as possible the full picture of the facts of the case, and the more accurate the judge is, the more likely he is to make a judgment that is convincing to all parties.In practice, however, "precision" means greater cost and judges' own qualities.The judge's own quality level also cannot leave the cost restriction.What is the theoretical basis for the relevant provisions of contract interpretation in China's contract Law; in the trend of civil law system from objectivism contract interpretation to subjectivism contract interpretation,Whether the theoretical basis of contract interpretation adopted in contract Law of our country is out of date and lagging behind the development of productive forces has resulted in the appearance of different judgments in the same case.To a certain extent, the research on the above problems is helpful to reduce the appearance of different judgments in the same case and to maintain the judicial credibility.
【学位授予单位】：兰州大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D923.6

【参考文献】