论诉讼时效期间的起算

发布时间：2018-06-12 14:07

本文选题：诉讼时效期间起算 + 权利被侵害　；参考：《华东政法大学》2007年硕士论文

【摘要】： 诉讼时效,是指权利人怠于行使请求权的事实状态持续地达到法定期间,义务人取得时效抗辩权,一旦行使,权利人就丧失请求权的制度。诉讼时效的核心要件在于权利人怠于行使请求权,而怠于行使即能够行使而不行使,因此,诉讼时效期间只能从权利人能够行使请求权时起算。然而,民法通则第137条却规定,诉讼时效期间从权利人知道或者应当知道权利被侵害之日起算,即所谓的权利被侵害说。这并不完全符合诉讼时效的核心要件,因为权利人知道或者应当知道权利被侵害之日未必是权利人能够行使请求权之时,而权利人能够行使请求权之时也未必是权利人知道或者应当知道权利被侵害之日,以权利被侵害说作为诉讼时效期间起算的一般标准,极易偏离诉讼时效的目的。因此,权利被侵害说实有修正之必要,本文在此基础上专门研究诉讼时效期间的起算问题。除了导言及结语外,本文由以下三章构成: 第一章诉讼时效概述,首先提出诉讼时效并不在于侵夺权利人而保护义务人,它旨在保障交易安全,以此防止机械适用诉讼时效期间的起算标准;其次明确诉讼时效的效力为抗辩权发生,或言请求权消灭,为阐述诉讼时效的适用范围奠定基础;再者说明诉讼时效的适用范围,强调诉讼时效只适用于请求权,但是并非所有的请求权都适用诉讼时效;最后阐述诉讼时效的构成要件,提出诉讼时效的核心要件在于权利人怠于行使请求权,而怠于行使即能够行使而不行使。第二章诉讼时效期间的起算标准,在概括分析诉讼时效期间起算的不同立法例以及学理解释的基础上,提出诉讼时效期间起算的一般标准,即从权利人能够行使给付请求权时起算,并且权利人能够行使给付请求权是指:1、给付请求权的成立;2、给付请求权的行使不存在法律上的障碍;3、权利人知道或者应当知道给付请求权的成立;4、权利人知道或者应当知道义务人;5、给付请求权的行使不存在事实上的障碍。第三章诉讼时效期间起算的类型化,第一节侵权损害赔偿请求权诉讼时效期间的起算,提出此类请求权的诉讼时效期间从权利人知道或者应当知道权利被侵害以及具体的侵害人时起算;第二节未定履行期限的债权的诉讼时效期间的起算,提出此类债权的诉讼时效期间从债权成立时起算;第三节基于无效合同产生的请求权,包括动产返还请求权以及基于缔约过失责任产生的损害赔偿请求权的诉讼时效期间的起算;第四节其他争议较大的请求权,包括分期付款的债权以及保证债权的诉讼时效期间的起算。
[Abstract]:The limitation of action means that the obligee continues to reach the legal period in the factual state of exercising the right of claim, and the obligor acquires the right of defense of limitation, and once exercised, the obligee loses the right of claim. The core element of the limitation of action is that the obligee is not able to exercise the right of claim, but he can exercise it without exercising it. Therefore, the period of limitation of action can only be counted from the time when the obligee can exercise the right of claim. However, article 137 of the General principles of Civil Law stipulates that the period of limitation of action shall be counted from the date on which the obligee knows or ought to know that the right has been infringed, that is, the so-called right is infringed. This is not entirely in line with the core requirements of the statute of limitations, because the right holder knows or should know that the date on which the right is infringed may not be the time when the right holder is able to exercise his right of claim. However, when the obligee can exercise the right of claim, it is not necessarily the day that the right holder knows or should know that the right is infringed, so it is easy to deviate from the purpose of the statute of limitations because of the right being infringed as the general standard of the limitation period. Therefore, it is necessary to amend the right infringed theory. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, this paper consists of the following three chapters: the first chapter is an overview of the limitation of action. First of all, it is proposed that the limitation of action does not lie in the infringement of the obligee but in the protection of the obligor, it is aimed at ensuring the security of the transaction. In order to prevent mechanical application of the limitation period of the starting standard; secondly, it is clear that the validity of the statute of action for the occurrence of the right of defense, or the right of claim to eliminate, for the purpose of elaborating the scope of application of the statute of limitations; furthermore, explain the scope of application of the statute of limitations, It is emphasized that the limitation of action is only applicable to the right of claim, but not all the claims are applicable to the limitation of action. Finally, the author expounds the constitutive elements of the limitation of action, and points out that the core element of the limitation of action is the oblivion of the obligee to exercise the right of claim. But to exercise is to be able to exercise and not to exercise. Chapter two, the starting standard of the limitation period, on the basis of the general analysis of the different legislative cases and the theoretical explanation of the limitation period, the general standard of the limitation period is put forward. That is, from the time when the obligee is able to exercise his right to claim for payment, And the obligee can exercise the right to claim for payment, that is, 1: 1, the establishment of the right to claim for payment, the right to claim for payment does not have any legal obstacles, the obligee knows or should know the establishment of the right to claim for payment, the obligee knows or should know the establishment of the right to claim for payment, and the obligee knows or should know the establishment of the right to claim for payment. The obligor should know that there is no de facto obstacle to the exercise of the right to claim payment. Chapter III the typology of the limitation period of action, section 1 the commencement of the period of limitation of action for the right of claim for tort damages, The limitation period for filing such a claim shall be counted from the time when the obligee knows or ought to know that the right has been infringed and the specific infringer; section II, the limitation period for claims with no time limit for performance, The limitation period for filing such claims shall be counted from the time the claim is established; section III shall be based on the right of claim arising from an invalid contract, Including the claim for the return of movable property and the commencement of the limitation period for the claim for damages arising from the liability for negligence in contracting; section IV. Includes claims on instalments and the commencement of the limitation period for securing claims.
【学位授予单位】：华东政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2007
【分类号】：D913

【参考文献】