【作者】 刘卉；

【导师】 崔建远；

【作者基本信息】 清华大学 ， 民商法学， 2005， 硕士

【摘要】 自19世纪以来,伴随着交易方式的转变,社会组织日益复杂庞大,垄断加剧,消费者、劳动者等弱势群体保护的问题凸显出来。社会经济的发展变化,导致现代合同法的核心任务与以前相比,更加强化对交易安全和正义的维护,保护合同的实质公正,保护消费者的利益。第三人利益合同,正是帮助和促进现代合同法实现核心任务和功能的重要制度。基于第三人利益合同重要性的考虑,本文从分析第三人利益合同的概念和特性开始,重点就《中华人民共和国合同法》(以下简称为《合同法》)第64条是否规定了第三人利益合同的问题进行了讨论。文章从了解第三人利益合同产生的历史过程、产生原因和发展入手,继而分析它与合同相对性原则的关系,认识了第三人利益合同的法律性质和在债法中的法律地位。通过对第三人利益合同所具有的社会功能的分析,使得第三人利益合同随着社会经济的发展而日益凸现的重要作用鲜明地表现出来。第三人利益合同的构成要件和法律效力,从具体制度的层面,展现了第三人利益合同在实际生活中的法律要求和操作过程。在对《合同法》第64条进行解释时,从条文的文义解释入手,认为该条文可以涵盖为第三人而授权的合同和真正的第三人利益合同两种截然不同的制度类型,使得第64条构成我国《合同法》上的法律漏洞。对该漏洞的填补,是对其进行目的性限缩解释。从现实需要的角度考虑,法律必须对第三人利益合同的法律事实做出明确规定,不应将其轻易排除于法律规定之外;第二,从历史因素上考察,如果将第64条解释为第三人利益合同,并不会出乎立法者的意料之外,即该解释不会悖于立法者的立法意图;第三,从第64条与第65条的关联性以及它在整个《合同法》的体系来看,适宜将它解释为是第三人利益合同的规定;最后,通过对法律规定这两种制度类型的必要性进行比较,以及对将第64条解释为其他制度的不合理性进行阐述后,得出结论:应该将《合同法》第64条解释为是关于第三人利益合同的规定。更多还原

【Abstract】 Social structure has become more huge and complicated as the change of tradepattern in recent years since 19th century. Intensified monopolization and issues onprotection to the weak group, consumers and labors for instance, emerges gradually.Changes and development in social economy has led the core content changes onmodern contract laws, further strengthening the request for trading security andprotection on justice. The contract of beneficial third party is one important institutionin performing the core function and assignment of modern contract law. Consideringthe importance of the contract of beneficial third party, this article will mainly focuson discussing whether the contract of beneficial third party is stipulated on List 64thin Contract Law of the People’s Republic Country of China, through analyzing thedefinition and feature of the contract of beneficial third party.Introducing the historical progress, cause of appearance and the development ofthe contract of beneficial third party;the article identifies the legal feature and statusof the contract through analyzing the relation between the contract and the principleof private of contract. The import role of the contract is then rightly manifested byanalysis on its social function. In addition, the elements of the contract and its legalforce reflect the contract’s legal function and working process in social reality.Firstly, starting from the definition interpretation to the literature content inexplaining the List 64th in Contract Law of the People’s Republic Country of China,this article deems the List cover two completely different categories of contracts--the contract of beneficial third party and the contract of authorizing the third party,The wrong coverage makes the List 64th become a legal defect. To revise such defect,the List should narrow its interpretation focus. To make it more specifically from areality aspect, the List must have specification on legal fact about the contract ofbeneficial third party, instead of excluding this contract out of consideration.Secondly, through reviewing historical factors, if the List is explained as the contractof beneficial third party, it will not fall out of the lawmakers’ expectation, that is, itwill not be against the lawmakers’ intent in law stipulation. Thirdly, reviewing fromthe affiliation of the List 64th and the List 65th, and the status of List 64th in the overallsystem of the Contract Law, the List will be more properly to be explained as thecontract of beneficial third party. Finally, through the comparison to legal necessitiesfor the two categories of contracts, meanwhile illustrating that it is illogic to explainthe List as other category of regulations, the conclusion is drawn that the List 64th inContract Law of the People’s Republic Country of China should be explained as theregulation of the contract of beneficial third party.更多还原