论我国合同法上的法定抵销权制度
发布时间:2018-05-29 12:04
本文选题:法定抵销权 + 成立要件 ; 参考:《西南政法大学》2011年硕士论文
【摘要】:法定抵销权制度,是民商法领域重要的制度之一。然而,我国《合同法》却对法定抵销权制度的许多内容没有进行规定。立法的缺失直接导致了司法实践中法律适用的难题。笔者通过考察抵销的历史沿革以及国外相关立法,对法定抵销权的行使方式及效力进行了分析,在此基础上针对我国合同法上法定抵销权制度存在的不足,提出了完善此制度的疏浅建议,期望有益于我国合同法上法定抵销权制度的完善,这是本文写作的主要目的。 本文分为六个部分: 第一部分是对法定抵销权制度历史沿革的考察。通过对大陆法系和英美法系相关立法的考察,得出法定抵销权的适用范围有逐步扩大的趋势,并且其价值追求更加体现含有社会因素的公平。 第二部分分析了法定抵销权的概念和性质。法定抵销权是指依单方意思表示即可发生抵销效果的权利,其性质为形成权。 第三部分分析了法定抵销权制度的地位和功能。它是一种独立的债的消灭原因,并且具有便利节约功能、公平功能、减少债务纠纷的功能和确保债权效力,具有一定的担保功能。 第四部分分析了法定抵销权的成立要件。首先分析了其成立的积极要件:双方债权须合法有效存在;两个债权对双方当事人而言具有相互对立性;双方债务的标的物种类、品质相同;主动债权已届清偿期。同时也对一些例外情况进行了分析。然后对法定抵销权成立的消极要件进行了论述:依法律规定不得抵销之债;依合同性质不得抵销之债;依当事人约定不得抵销之债。但需注意的是:附有抗辩权的债权并不影响法定抵销权的成立。若主动债权上附有抗辩权,债务人在行使法定抵销权后,对方当事人行使抗辩权的,仅会阻碍法定抵销权行使效力的发生。若被动债权上附有抗辩权,债务人可以放弃此抗辩利益,享有法定抵销权。 第五部分论述的是法定抵销权的行使方式及效力。其行使应由债务人向对方当事人作出法定抵销的意思表示,并不得附条件或附期限。但我国《合同法司法解释(二)》为了双方当事人的利益平衡,设定了异议期限,故其行使效力应分为不同情形:债务人在行使法定抵销权后,如果对方当事人没有在约定的或合理的异议期限内向法院提起异议之诉,则法定抵销权的行使效力溯及至适于抵销时发生;如果对方当事人在约定的或合理的异议期限内向法院提起异议之诉的,由人民法院进行审理,经法院认定异议不成立的,其行使效力依然溯及至适于抵销时发生,人民法院认定异议成立的,则不发生法定抵销权的行使效力。 第六部分分析了我国合同法上法定抵销权制度的不足及完善措施。针对存在的不足,应从以下几个方面进行完善:首先,完善法定抵销权成立的积极要件;其次,充实法定抵销权成立的消极要件;最后,明确法定抵销权的行使方式及效力。
[Abstract]:The system of legal right of set-off is one of the important systems in the field of civil and commercial law. However, the contract Law of our country has not provided for many contents of the legal right of set-off. The lack of legislation directly leads to the difficult problem of the application of law in judicial practice. By investigating the historical evolution of set-off and relevant foreign legislation, the author analyzes the way and effect of the exercise of the legal right of set-off, and on this basis, aims at the deficiency of the system of legal right of set-off in the contract law of our country. This paper puts forward some suggestions to perfect this system, which is expected to be beneficial to the perfection of the legal right of set-off in the contract law of our country, which is the main purpose of this paper. This paper is divided into six parts: The first part is a review of the historical evolution of the legal right of set-off. Through the investigation of the relevant legislation of civil law system and common law system, it is concluded that the scope of application of legal right of set-off has a tendency to expand gradually, and its value pursuit more embodies the equity with social factors. The second part analyzes the concept and nature of legal right of set-off. The legal right of set-off refers to the right of set-off which can be expressed according to the unilateral intention, and its nature is the right of formation. The third part analyzes the status and function of the legal right of set-off. It is an independent reason for the elimination of debt, and has the function of convenience and economy, fairness, reducing the function of debt disputes and ensuring the validity of creditor's rights. The fourth part analyzes the requirements of the establishment of the legal right of set-off. First of all, it analyzes the positive elements of its establishment: the two claims must exist legally and effectively; the two claims are opposite to each other to the parties; the subject matter of both parties' debts are of the same quality; the active creditor's rights have reached the liquidation period. At the same time, some exceptions are also analyzed. Then it discusses the negative elements of the establishment of the legal right of set-off: the debt which can not be offset according to the law, the debt which can not be offset according to the nature of the contract, and the debt which can not be offset according to the agreement of the parties. However, it should be noted that the claim with the right of defense does not affect the establishment of the legal right of set-off. If the right of defense is attached to the active creditor's rights, if the debtor exercises the legal right of set-off, the counterparty exercises the right of defense, which will only hinder the effect of the exercise of the legal right of set-off. If there is a defense on the passive creditor's rights, the debtor can give up the defense interest and enjoy the legal right of set-off. The fifth part discusses the way and effect of the legal right of set-off. Its exercise shall be expressed by the debtor to the other party, and shall not be subject to conditions or time limits. However, in order to balance the interests of both parties, the judicial interpretation of contract Law in China sets a time limit for dissent, so the effect of its exercise should be divided into different situations: after the debtor has exercised the legal right of set-off, If the other party fails to file a challenge action with the court within the agreed or reasonable objection period, the exercise of the statutory right of set-off shall be effective until it is suitable for set-off; If the other party brings an objection to the court within an agreed or reasonable objection period, it shall be tried by the people's court. If the court determines that the objection is untenable, the exercise effect of the objection shall still be retroactive until it is suitable for set-off, Where a people's court determines that an objection is established, the exercise of the legal right of set-off shall not take place. The sixth part analyzes the deficiency of the legal right of set-off in the contract law of our country and the measures to improve it. In view of the shortcomings, we should perfect the following aspects: first, perfect the positive elements of the establishment of the legal right of set-off; secondly, enrich the negative elements of the establishment of the legal right of set-off; finally, make clear the way and effect of the exercise of the legal right of set-off.
【学位授予单位】:西南政法大学
【学位级别】:硕士
【学位授予年份】:2011
【分类号】:D923.6
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前9条
1 廖军,解春;抵销与反诉——历史与价值的探讨[J];比较法研究;2005年01期
2 任友谊,郭婷;建立与完善我国民商法体系中的抵销权法律制度[J];河北法学;2002年S1期
3 杨立新,刘宗胜;论抗辩与抗辩权[J];河北法学;2004年10期
4 申建平;;论债权让与中债务人之抵销权[J];法学;2007年05期
5 刘学在;论诉讼中的抵销(下)[J];法学评论;2003年04期
6 廖军;论抵销的形式及其效力[J];法律科学-西北政法学院学报;2004年03期
7 肖祥礼;民事诉讼中被告的防卫——抵销[J];邵阳学院学报;2003年04期
8 耿林;诉讼上抵销的性质[J];清华大学学报(哲学社会科学版);2004年03期
9 李龙;民事诉讼诉的合并问题探讨[J];现代法学;2005年02期
相关硕士学位论文 前1条
1 丁洁;论债的抵销之担保功能[D];中国政法大学;2007年
,本文编号:1950816
本文链接:https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/sflw/1950816.html