当前位置:主页 > 硕博论文 > 社科硕士论文 >

论我国分居制度的构建

发布时间:2018-09-09 18:59
【摘要】:分居从字面上理解就是夫妻双方分开居住,究其原因可能是主观上的,也可能是客观上的,但若从法律角度理解分居的含义则有其特定属性。一般认为,分居是指夫妻因无法维持共同生活而依据判决或合意在一定期间内依法免除同居义务,但仍保留婚姻关系的法律制度。分居制度最初源于古罗马的《十二铜表法》,中世纪欧洲寺院法最终确立了该制度,将其作为一项解决禁止离婚主义与社会现实之间尖锐矛盾的手段在欧洲各国开始实行。随着文艺复兴和宗教改革运动的兴起,禁止离婚主义逐渐被许可离婚主义所替代,分居制度失去了其最初的作用与目的,但该制度并未因此消失,而是被世界各国立法不断地发展和完善,重新焕发勃勃生机,成为各国调整婚姻关系的重要法律制度。 反观我国大陆,目前没有关于分居制度的相关立法,仅在1989年最高人民法院颁布的《人民法院夫妻感情认定意见》中规定“因感情不和分居已满三年,确无和好可能的,或经人民法院判决不准离婚后又分居满一年,不履行夫妻义务的。”将分居一定期间作为夫妻感情确已破裂的认定标准之一。2001年修改后的《婚姻法》第32条明确规定:“因感情不和分居满两年的,应准予离婚。”将“分居”作为离婚的法定理由。然而,无论是司法解释还是婚姻立法都没有对分居的涵义、形式及法定事由等进行规定。可见,分居制度在我国立法上仍处于空白地带,此项立法漏洞导致事实分居现象得不到规制、当事人的合法权益无法得到保障、司法实践操作困难等一系列社会现实问题的产生。本文研究的目的及意义在于通过分析总结两大法系主要国家的分居立法经验,以我国婚姻家庭关系的现实情况为基础,构建符合我国国情的分居制度,完善我国婚姻家庭立法体系以及保护婚姻当事人合法权益。 本文运用比较分析法、历史研究法、逻辑分析法等方法,对分居制度进行了研究和探讨,本文共分三个部分: 第一部分:分居制度的概述。该部分介绍了分居制度的历史沿革,对分居制度的基本内涵进行阐述,通过分析分居本身具有的权利属性来论述建立分居制度的理论基础。 第二部分:分居制度的比较法考察。该部分介绍了两大法系主要国家及港澳台地区有关分居制度的立法现状,对分居制度的立法模式、分居种类、法律效力等内容进行了比较分析,为我国分居制度的构建提供借鉴。 第三部分:我国分居制度的立法构想。该部分针对我国有关分居离婚理由的规定,并就我国设立分居制度的可行性和必要性进行了分析探讨,指出立法欠缺分居制度存在的现实问题,提出了我国设立分居制度的具体立法构想。
[Abstract]:Separation literally means that husband and wife live separately, the reason may be subjective or objective, but if the meaning of separation is understood from the legal point of view, it has its specific attribute. It is generally believed that separation refers to the legal system in which the husband and wife can not maintain a common life according to the judgment or agreement to waive the obligation of cohabitation within a certain period of time but still retain the marital relationship. The separation system originated from the "Twelve Bronze Table Law" in ancient Rome. The Middle Ages European monastery law finally established the separation system as a means to resolve the sharp contradiction between divorce prohibition and social reality in European countries. With the rise of the Renaissance and the Reformation Movement, the prohibition of divorce was gradually replaced by the doctrine of allowing divorce, and the separation system lost its original function and purpose, but it did not disappear. Instead, it is constantly developed and perfected by the legislation of various countries all over the world, and becomes an important legal system for the adjustment of marriage relations in various countries. In contrast, in mainland China, there is currently no relevant legislation on the separation system. Only in 1989, the Supreme people's Court promulgated the opinion on the determination of marital feelings in the Supreme people's Court, which stipulates that "it has been three years since the separation because of emotional discord, and there is really no possibility of reconciliation." Or if the people's court has ruled against divorce and has separated for another year and fails to perform his obligations as a husband and wife. " Article 32 of the Marriage Law, amended in 2001, clearly states that "divorce shall be granted if the couple has been separated for two years because of an emotional discord." Use "separation" as a legal ground for divorce. However, neither judicial interpretation nor marriage legislation provides for the meaning, form and legal reasons of separation. It can be seen that the separation system is still in a blank area in our legislation. This legislative loophole leads to the fact separation phenomenon can not be regulated, the legitimate rights and interests of the parties can not be protected. The emergence of a series of social practical problems such as the difficulty of judicial practice. The purpose and significance of this study is to analyze and summarize the legislative experience of separation in the major countries of the two legal systems, and to construct the separation system in accordance with the national conditions of our country on the basis of the actual situation of marriage and family relations in our country. Improve our marriage and family legislation system and protect the legitimate rights and interests of marriage parties. This paper uses the methods of comparative analysis, historical research and logic analysis to study and discuss the separation system. This paper is divided into three parts: the first part: the summary of separation system. This part introduces the historical evolution of separation system, expounds the basic connotation of separation system, and discusses the theoretical basis of establishing separation system by analyzing the property of right of separation. The second part: a comparative study of separation system. This part introduces the legislative status of separation system in the main countries of the two legal systems and the areas of Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan, and makes a comparative analysis of the legislative model, the category and the legal effect of the separation system. To provide reference for the construction of separation system in China. The third part: legislation conception of separation system in our country. This part analyzes and discusses the feasibility and necessity of establishing separation system in our country, and points out the practical problems in the absence of separation system in legislation. Put forward the concrete legislative conception of establishing separation system in our country.
【学位授予单位】:山西大学
【学位级别】:硕士
【学位授予年份】:2013
【分类号】:D923.9

【参考文献】

相关期刊论文 前7条

1 王勤芳;;别居法律制度研究[J];长春理工大学学报(社会科学版);2006年06期

2 宋智慧;以契约理念透视婚姻本质[J];长沙理工大学学报(社会科学版);2004年04期

3 李灵;隋晶;;初探别居制度[J];法制与社会;2007年04期

4 鲍家志;梁庆秋;;质疑“别居制度”[J];前沿;2006年05期

5 陈苇;罗晓玲;;设立我国分居制度的社会基础及其制度构想(上)[J];政法论丛;2011年01期

6 夏吟兰;离婚衡平机制研究[J];中华女子学院学报;2004年05期

7 邓伟平,林博;从香港法上的分居制度引发的思考[J];中山大学学报(社会科学版);2003年06期

相关重要报纸文章 前1条

1 赵洲;[N];人民法院报;2009年



本文编号:2233281

资料下载
论文发表

本文链接:https://www.wllwen.com/shoufeilunwen/shuoshibiyelunwen/2233281.html


Copyright(c)文论论文网All Rights Reserved | 网站地图 |

版权申明:资料由用户fa350***提供,本站仅收录摘要或目录,作者需要删除请E-mail邮箱bigeng88@qq.com