论同时履行抗辩权的扩张适用

发布时间：2018-04-26 15:34

本文选题：同时履行抗辩权 + 扩张适用　；参考：《中国政法大学》2012年硕士论文

【摘要】：同时履行抗辩权是指双务合同的一方当事人，在对方当事人未为对待给付前，得拒绝履行自己债务的权利。同时履行抗辩权是现代合同法上一项重要制度，它的确立完善了我国双务合同履行抗辩权体系，具有鼓励双方履行合同义务和促进债权实现的作用。世界大多数国家都确立了此项制度，我国亦不例外。但是由于我国《合同法》上同时履行抗辩权适用范围较为狭窄，导致实践中在很多国家和地区的相关法律中可以类推适用或准用同时履行抗辩权的情形在我国于法无据。随着该制度的发展，同时履行抗辩权逐渐显现出其适用范围上的扩张需求和扩张空间。本文基于现实需求，以诚实信用原则和债的牵连性为理论基础，分析同时履行抗辩权扩张适用的必要性和合理性，并参照比较法上扩张的立法例，研究同时履行抗辩权在我国相关法律上的适用空间，探索该制度扩张适用的范围和限制，为将来的司法实践提供理论依据。本文运用比较分析法、体系分析法等论述方法阐释同时履行抗辩权的扩张适用，全文除前言和结论部分外共分五部分，结构如下：第一部分，简要说明我国法律中有关同时履行抗辩权适用范围规定的不足和扩张适用的必要性。第二部分，主要论述同时履行抗辩权扩张适用的理论基础、现实基础和比较法上的扩张趋势。诚实信用原则、债的牵连性、合同自由和合同目的是同时履行抗辩权扩张适用的理论基础；契约多样性和合同发展的要求，节约成本、诉讼经济的要求是其扩张的现实基础；比较法上的扩张趋势对同时履行抗辩权完善与发展有重要参考价值。第三部分，主要对当代大陆法系主要国家和地区以及英美法系的类似制度中关于同时履行抗辩权扩张的立法和研究进行了考察、比较和分析，并对这些立法和司法实践进行了简要评价。主要列举了德国、法国、日本、荷兰、我国台湾地区等大陆法系国家和地区立法例关于同时履行抗辩权的相关规定的发展趋势以及英美法上的类似制度，在此基础上本文对上述相关制度的异同进行了比较分析。第四部分，在前文理论基础的论证和比较法考察的基础上，对同时履行抗辩权扩张适用情形进行类型化分析，主要将其归纳为三类：一是双务合同的替代性债权扩张适用情形；二是双务合同的扩张情形；三是具有牵连性和对立性的同一经济生活关系的适用情形，找到其适用范围的张力，并逐一分析其扩张适用的可行性。第五部分，文章分析同时履行抗辩权扩张的界限。扩张违背诚实信用原则的，一方依行为表明没有继续履行合同的诚意的，不得随意适用。同时明确同时履行抗辩权与抵消权、留置权的界限。只有划清与相邻制度的界限，，才能防止矫枉过正。最后结论中本文提出建议对《合同法》第66条做扩张解释。
[Abstract]:At the same time , the performance of the right of defense refers to the right of one party of the dual - service contract to refuse to perform its own debts before the other party fails to pay the benefits . At the same time , it is an important system in the modern contract law .

This paper uses comparative analysis method , system analysis method and so on to interpret the expansion application of the right of defense , except for the preface and conclusion part , it is divided into five parts . The structure is as follows :

In the first part , the article briefly describes the necessity of the inadequacy and expansion of the application of the right of defense in our country ' s law .

The second part mainly discusses the theoretical foundation , the realistic foundation and the comparative law ' s expansion trend of the concurrent performance of the application of defense right expansion . The principle of honesty , the continuity of debt , the freedom of contract and the purpose of the contract are the theoretical basis for the extension of the right of defense at the same time ;
The requirement of contract diversity and contract development , the cost saving and the requirement of litigation economy are the realistic foundation of its expansion ;
The trend of expansion on comparative law is of great reference value to the perfection and development of defense right at the same time .

In the third part , we study , compare and analyze the legislation and the study on the extension of the right of defense at the same time in the similar system of the major countries and regions of the contemporary continental law system and the Anglo - American law system , and give a brief evaluation of these legislation and judicial practice . The article mainly lists the development trend of the relevant regulations of the civil law system countries and regions of Germany , France , Japan , the Netherlands , Taiwan and so on , as well as the similar system in Anglo - American law . On the basis of this , the similarities and differences of the above - mentioned systems are compared .

The fourth part , on the basis of the previous theoretical foundation and comparative law , carries on the typed analysis on the application situation of the concurrent performance of the defense right expansion , mainly summarizes them into three categories : one is the application of alternative creditor ' s rights extension of the dual - service contract ;
secondly , the expansion of the dual - service contract ;
Third , it is the application of the same economic life relationship with continuity and opposites , finds out the tension of its application range , and analyzes the feasibility of its expansion by one by one .

In the fifth part , the article analyzes the limits of the expansion of the defense right at the same time . When the expansion violates the principle of honesty and credibility , one party does not insist on the sincerity of the contract without continuing to perform the contract . At the same time , it is clear that the boundary between the right to defense and the right to set - off and the right of lien can be fulfilled at the same time .

In the final conclusion , the article puts forward some suggestions to expand the interpretation of Article 66 of the Contract Law .

【学位授予单位】：中国政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D923.6

【参考文献】