【作者】 孟丹；

【导师】 文杰；

【作者基本信息】 华中师范大学 ， 民商法学， 2008， 硕士

【摘要】 法律是社会的产物,自然应当顺应社会的变迁。在法律实践中,给付不能的情况是经常出现的,因为在合同的实现过程中经常会遇到各种障碍问题,如债务人因为不可抗力无法履行合同,或是合同标的物的灭失致使合同目的无法实现等。在理论上,给付不能效力的确定会涉及到债权人和债务人的权利实现和义务履行,还有相应的法律效果等问题。因此,有必要在理论上对给付不能的效力做较为深入的研究,从而指导和解决在实践中出现的关于给付不能效力的问题。本文的主要研究内容为:以大陆法系主要的立法代表德国为出发点,将德国2002年债法改革的成果作为研究基础,围绕目前理论界关于给付不能效力的争议焦点,对两大法系及国际协定中的给付不能效力进行比较评析,分析其利弊,结合我国关于给付不能的效力规定,解决我国现阶段在理论与立法上的不足,从而构建有机、统一、协调的给付不能的效力制度。首先,列举出目前理论界对给付不能效力问题所产生的一系列争议。理论分歧主要集中在对自始不能合同效力的确定,自始主观不能与自始客观不能的合同效力是否一致以及是否统一界定自始不能与嗣后不能合同效力等问题上。这是学者对传统民法理论在价值取向上的深入思考所激发出的火花,在自始不能的合同效力的判断上,学者们用最激烈的批判声指责信奉“给付不能不构成债”教条的教徒们。传统理论在给付不能类型化基础上,对其效力进行了区分。学者们对此不认同,因为该效力区分缺少明确的划分界限,在实践中也不具可操作性。其次,比较分析两大法系与相关的国际协定中有关给付不能效力的规定,了解当前全球化的背景下给付不能效力规定及其发展趋势。德国新债法在给付不能效力的规定是较符合现代实践的,但其依然未能充分考虑当事人的利益,平衡双方的利益,一旦出现合同当事人都有过失的情况下,合同的效力内容难以确定。法国法在自始不能效力的确定上,虽然适用范围较窄,但其立法灵活。英美法中对给付不能效力的规定是较合理的,注重衡平当事人的利益。国际协定在规定给付不能的效力时不够全面,未考虑到合同因为共同错误或是欺诈等情况所引起的给付不能情况。通过比较发现两大法系与国际协定在给付不能效力规定中存在一些趋同点,并给我国在给付不能的效力制度的构建一定的启示。最后,立足于我国的立法现状,结合我国学理上关于给付不能效力的理论,发现我国学理与立法上的不一致。为了促进我国在给付不能效力制度不断发展和完善,应将加强立法与理论发展的同步,在学理上为立法提供明确规定给付不能合同有效的法律规则的理论依据,或是在审判实践中确立一套较为全面的司法解释来规制给付不能的合同效力。在设计给付不能合同效力时,还要合理衔接给付不能效力的相关制度,将无权处分合同与自始主观不能的合同有效性进行适当的安排、并协调好自始不能的效力内容中的相关制度。具体而言,就是要科学地设置给付不能的合同效力,统一界定自始主观不能与自始客观不能的合同效力,对自始不能的效力规定不能一概而论,而应作出原则性规定,且将其与嗣后不能合同的效力规定有机结合起来。更多还原

【Abstract】 Law is born of and naturally changed with society. When in legal practice, impossibility of performance usually occur because of various barriers and problems in contract performance. For example, Debtor can not carry out the contract for force majeureb or the damage and perdition of nominated objects in contract. In the abstract, impossibility of performance indeed be involved the rights and obligations performing in both of debtor and debtee, as well as legal effect and so on. Therefore, it is necessary for us to make a deep research and study in impossibility of performance effect in order to instruct and solve the associated problems.The main study content of this thesis are as follows: On basis of the results of Debt Law Reformation in Germany in 2002, the main legislation representative of Continental Law System, focusing on the debates in theory circle about impossibility of performance, we are to compare the two law systems and international conventions, analyse of the advantages and disadvantages of each; to remedy the deficiency in theory and legislation in present period, conforming domestic regulations about impossibility of performance effect, to construct a organic, uniform, harmonious impossibility of performance effect regulation.At first, to list a series of debates caused by impossibility of performance in theory circle. The theory divergences pool in the initial uncertaining of impossibility of performance, the accordance in the initially subjective and objective impossibility of performance, and uniformation in dividing initial and aferward of impossibility. This is the sparkles of learners’ deep thought on traditional civil law theory in value. On initial of impossibility, they furiously condemn doctrinarians who embrace "Impossibility of performance does not make the debt". They disagree dividions in styles which made by traditional theory about impossibility of performance because that lacks of clear dividing line and is immaneuverable in practice.Secondly, analysing by comparing between the two law systems and international conventions on impossibility of performance effect, we are to learn the impossibility of performance and its developing trend under the globlization nowad ays. The New German Debt Law obtain the new vital force and vigors from that change, and its modernization is consistent with the modern practice. However, New Law neither considerate the interest of privy nor equalize the interests of both sides, which makes uncertaining of contract effect once the mistakes appears on both sides. The laws in France is narrow in application range on derterminant of initail of impossibility, but flexible in legistration. While laws in US and UK is reasonable in impossibility of performance, especailly on the equalization on the interests of both sides. And international conventions is incomprehensive in effect of impossibility of performance, and out of consideration in impossibility of performance caused by common mistakes and cheats. We also can make out the common points between the two law systems and international conventitons on impossibility of performance effect so as to give a revelation on the on regulations of impossibility of performance effect in our country, by comparing the concrete regulation items on impossibility of performance effect between New and Old Laws in Germany, and by analysing the flexibility of laws in France and the improvement and consummation of laws in U.S, U.K. and internaitonal conventions.At last, on view of the present situation of legistration in our country, consulting the theory of effect of impossibility of performance in domestic academic circle. In order to continually promote the development of impossibility of performance effect regulation, to enhance synchronization development of legistration and theory, offer in studying the science for legislating and stipulate clearly that can’t pay the walid regular theoretical foundation of law of the contract, establish one more comprehensive judicial explanation. While can’t pay the validity of the contract to designing, rational link up the related regulations of impossibility of performance,. It have no right by contract of punishing with the subjective since beginning can contract validity last appropriate arrangement. Partiailarly, sciently set the contract effect of impossibility of performance, validity of the contract that until since the beginning is objective can be define beginning subjective since in unison,for since beginning can validity of the contract can treat as the same. We should make sense of principle regulation, and it until can’t effect of the contract stipulate and combine with afterwards.更多还原