表见代理中本人可归责性要件的实证研究

发布时间：2018-02-23 18:44

本文关键词： 单一要件说双重要件说本人可归责性实证研究　出处：《中国社会科学院研究生院》2017年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：表见代理的构成要件历来存在着以“单一要件说”和“双重要件说”为主的两种对立的学术观点。即便《合同法》第49条的文义之中并未明确要求“本人可归责性”,仍有不少学者认为应当将本人可归责性作为表见代理的特殊构成要件之一,并相继提出了过错原则、关联原则、风险原则等不同的理论依据作为这一要件的判断标准。但将“本人可归责性”纳入表见代理的构成要件是否适合我国的司法实践以及如何明确具体的判断标准仍未有定论。针对上述问题,学术界大都在理论层面进行探讨,而实践是检验真理的唯一标准,因此本文在了解学界对表见代理构成要件的各种争议后,对涉及表见代理构成要件的115份法院裁判文书进行了统计分析,通过探究法院在审理案件中认定是否构成表见代理的裁判思路以及对本人可归责性要件的理解与适用,为进一步完善表见代理制度提供实证基础。本文分为五大部分:第一部分为绪论,主要从比较法的角度介绍了大陆法系国家对表见代理中本人可归责性要件的适用情况,并对我国的立法现状、理论界的各项学说以及本文的研究方法进行了介绍。第二部分系统的归纳了理论界关于表见代理构成要件的争议点,主要包括应否将本人可归责性纳入表见代理的构成要件,以及如何明确这一特殊要件的判断标准。第三部分为实证研究,笔者统计整理了115篇法院相关裁判文书,并从空间、时间、地域、审级等不同的角度进行分析研究。第四部分通过总结法院对上述问题的裁判思路和适用标准,探究司法实践与学术理论的差异。第五部分为结论,根据本文的实证分析,在司法实务中,法院主要采用了“单一要件说”的观点,倾向于保护善意第三人,且在个案中本人是否具有可归责性直接影响到相对人的信赖合理性。因此笔者认为,应坚持当前的立法选择,继续适用单一要件说,并将“本人可归责性”纳入相对人的合理信赖要件,作为判断相对人“有理由”相信的客观环境要素之一。
[Abstract]:There have always been two opposing academic viewpoints on the constitutive elements of apparent agency: "single element theory" and "double element theory". Even though article 49 of the contract law does not explicitly require that "I can impute responsibility" There are still many scholars who think that one should regard imputability as one of the special constituent elements of apparent agency. And has put forward the fault principle, the correlation principle one after another, Different theoretical basis, such as risk principle, is used as the judgment criterion of this element. However, it is still necessary to include "personal imputability" in the constitutive elements of apparent agency and whether it is suitable for judicial practice in our country and how to define the specific judgment criteria. There is no conclusion. In response to the above question, The academic circles mostly discuss in the theory level, but the practice is the only criterion to test the truth. Therefore, after understanding all kinds of disputes about the constituent elements of the apparent agency in the academic circles, This paper makes a statistical analysis on 115 documents of court decision concerning the constitutive elements of apparent agency, and probes into the thinking of the court in deciding whether it constitutes an apparent agency in the trial of a case, as well as the understanding and application of its imputable elements. This paper is divided into five parts: the first part is the introduction, mainly from the perspective of comparative law to introduce the civil law countries in the application of the apparent agent in the elements of imputability. In the second part, the author systematically summarizes the controversial points about the elements of apparent agency in the theoretical circle, and introduces the current situation of the legislation, the theories and the research methods of this paper. The third part is empirical research, the author statistics and collate 115 relevant court documents, and from the space. Analysis and research from different angles, such as time, region, trial level, etc. Part 4th explores the differences between judicial practice and academic theory by summing up the thinking and applicable standards of the court on the above issues. Part 5th is the conclusion. According to the empirical analysis of this paper, in the judicial practice, the court mainly adopts the viewpoint of "single element theory" and tends to protect the bona fide third party. And whether I have imputability in the case directly affects the credibility rationality of the relative party. Therefore, the author believes that we should stick to the current legislative choice and continue to apply the single element theory. "I imputability" is taken into account as one of the objective environmental elements to judge the relative person's "reasonable trust".
【学位授予单位】：中国社会科学院研究生院
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D923.6

【相似文献】