违约金酌减制度研究

发布时间：2018-05-02 09:06

本文选题：违约金酌减制度 + 合同自由　；参考：《华中师范大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：基于意思自治原则,我国《合同法》允许当事人可以自由约定违约金。同时为了避免约定的违约金数额过高致使合同双方利益严重失衡,法律也规定了违约金酌减制度。但我国有关违约金酌减制度的法律法规篇幅较少,内容过于模糊,甚至不同的法规之间存在矛盾,致使违约金酌减制度在实际运行中出现了许多问题。对违约金酌减制度加以研究,有利于细化违约金酌减制度的一般规则,为司法审判提供法律和理论基础,统一裁量标准。本文分五个部分对违约金酌减制度进行论述。第一部分主要是从违约金自身属性及维护合同正义两个方面论述了违约金酌减制度的理论依据。其中,重点澄清了违约金酌减实际上是对合同自由原则的修正,并未违背合同自由原则,为违约金酌减提供了坚定的理论基础。第二部分论述了违约金酌减制度的适用前提、适用范围和适用原则。首先我们讨论了违约金酌减制度的适用前提,指出违约金酌减以违约方提出申请和违约金条款生效为前提条件。接着通过对适用范围的3种学说进行辩证分析,得出违约金酌减制度既适用于赔偿性违约金又适用于惩罚性违约金。最后指出法院或仲裁机构在审理违约金酌减案件时应遵循谨慎适用原则和尊重当事人意愿原则。第三部分讨论了违约金酌减请求权的行使规则。本部分运用了反证法和辩证分析法对违约金酌减请求权的行使主体、行使方式和行使时间进行了详细的阐述,得出结论——违约金酌减请求权的主体仅限于当事人,且违约方只能通过反诉或反请求的方式行使违约金酌减请求权;在权利行使时间上,违约方在一审中未作出违约金酌减申请且未经法官释明的,违约金酌减请求权的行使时间可以延续至二审。第四部分阐述了违约金酌减制度的考量因素。重点包括三个方面:其一,违约造成的损失包括实际损失和可得利益损失;其二,违约方的过错程度影响违约金的酌减幅度,违约方“恶意违约”,即违约方故意违约,违约金亦有酌减的可能性;其三,违约金的类型、订立合同的形式不同,判断违约金是否过高的标准亦不同,惩罚性违约金以债务为判断视角,赔偿性违约金以债权人为判断视角。第五部分探讨了我国违约金酌减制度的完善。通过分析我国违约金酌减制度在实际运行中出现的问题,即规则模糊且混乱,缺乏统一的裁判尺度,进而提出完善建议。其一,从正面细化违约金酌减制度的一般规则。即明确规定法官释明权,明确规定违约金以不酌减为原则的指导思想,细化违约金过高的判断标准。其二,从反面列举违约金酌减的限制及排除适用情形。具体来说,格式条款中针对提供方的违约金不得减少,已经支付的违约金不得减少,恶意违约少减。本文研究的违约金酌减制度专指对约定违约金数额的调减,不包括对法定违约金的调整,亦不包括对约定赔偿额计算方法的约定违约金情形的调整。本文的创新之处在于,在结构上并未采取程序问题和实体问题两分法的构造,在完善建议上采取“两路并进”的立法思路,即正面细化规则、反面列举例外情形。
[Abstract]:Based on the principle of autonomy, China's "contract law" allows the parties to have a free agreement on the breach of contract. At the same time, in order to avoid the excessive amount of the contracted liquidated damages, the law also stipulates the system of defaulting on the breach of contract. There are contradictions between different laws and regulations, resulting in many problems in the actual operation of the system of default gold reduction. Study on the system of defaulting gold discretionary reduction is beneficial to refine the general rules of the system of defaulting gold, provide the legal and theoretical basis for judicial trial and unify the standard of discretion. This article is divided into five parts of the system of defaulting on gold. The first part mainly discusses the theoretical basis of the system of defaulting gold from the two aspects of its own property and the justice of the contract, which clarifies that the discretionary reduction of the breach gold is actually an amendment to the principle of the freedom of contract, and does not violate the principle of freedom of contract, and provides a firm theoretical basis for the reduction of the breach gold. The second part discusses the applicable premise, the scope of application and the application principle of the system of the defaulting gold discretionary reduction. Firstly, we discuss the applicable premise of the system of the defaulting gold discretionary reduction, and point out that the default gold should be reduced by the default party's application and the entry into force of the default gold bar, and then through the dialectical analysis of the 3 theories of the scope of application, we can draw a conclusion. The system is applicable to both the compensation and the punitive damages. Finally, it is pointed out that the court or arbitration institution should follow the principle of prudent application and the principle of respect for the wishes of the parties. The third part discusses the rules of the action of the discretionary claim for breach of contract gold. The method of evidence analysis expounds the exercise subject, the way of exercise and the time of exercise of the right of defaulting on the default gold, and draws a conclusion that the main body of the claim is only limited to the parties, and the default party can only exercise the right of defaulting on the discretionary gold by counterclaim or counterclaim; in the time of exercising the rights, the breach of contract Fang Zaiyi is a breach of contract. In the fourth part, the fourth part expounds the consideration factors of the system of defaulting gold, including three aspects: first, the losses caused by default include the actual loss and the benefit loss; secondly, the fault of the default party's fault. The extent that the extent affects the discretion of the breach of contract, the default party "malicious breach", that is, the default party is intentional breach of contract, the default gold also has the possibility of discretionary reduction; thirdly, the type of the breach of contract, the form of the contract is different, the standard of judging whether the breach is too high is different, the punitive breach of contract is the angle of judgment with the debt as the judgment, and the indemnified breach of contract gold is the creditor In order to judge the angle of view. The fifth part discusses the perfection of the discretionary system of default gold in China. Through the analysis of the problems arising in the actual operation of the system of defaulting gold in our country, that is, the rules are vague and confused, the unified judgment is lacking, and then the suggestions are put forward. The judge's interpretation right is clearly defined as the guiding ideology of the breach of contract as a guiding principle, and refine the judgment standard of excessive breach of contract. Secondly, enumerate the limitations and exclusions of the default gold from the reverse side. Specifically, the breach of contract against the provider in the form clause shall not be reduced, the default damages already paid shall not be reduced, and the malevolent default is less. The system of default gold reduction in this paper refers to the reduction of the amount of the prescribed liquidated damages, not including the adjustment of the legal breach of contract, nor the adjustment of the contractual penalty in the calculation of the agreed compensation amount. The innovation of this paper is that the structure of the dual method of process order and entity problem is not adopted in the structure, and it is finished. Good advice is to adopt the legislative idea of "two way in progress", that is, to refine rules carefully and to list exceptions on the contrary.

【学位授予单位】：华中师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D923.6

【参考文献】