【作者】 李金；

【导师】 李艳梅；

【作者基本信息】 广西师范大学 ， 法律（专业学位）， 2013， 硕士

【摘要】 在1985年10月1日的第六届全国人民代表大会上通过了《继承法》,但是,《继承法》的发展落后于时代的节奏。改革开放三十多年来,我国继承法取得了长足的进步：补充了有关继承的司法解释；制定了《遗嘱公证细则》。然而,在走过的这27个年头里,我国的经济、政治、文化、教育、科学、卫生、劳动等领域发生了重大的变化。尤其在进入21世纪后,城乡居民收入稳定增长,居民耐用消费品拥有量不断增加,居民住宅面积不断扩大,生活环境明显改善,继承观念不断更新。遗嘱继承中的遗嘱自由原则,是公民在私法领域中意思自治的体现,通过赋予该自由,才能使公民的私人合法财产得到更好的保护,任何自由都不是无限制的自由,遗嘱自由也一样,不是绝对的自由,由于遗嘱继承涉及继承人和被继承人的利益之外,还涉及到国家和第三人的利益,这就需要限定遗嘱自由原则,尽可能地既维护好个体利益,又维护好社会和国家利益,而对遗嘱处分财产的限制正是限定遗嘱自由原则的体现。目前我国对继承制度的各项研究已经取得了不少成就,但是对于遗产的处分限制方面还有一定的缺陷和不足。基于对以往的研究成果进行分析,本文从比较分析的角度就遗产处分限制立法的各个方面进行了阐述,并提出了完善建议。本文除引言和结语外,由三个部分组成,共计三万字左右。第一部分是遗嘱处分财产限制立法的理论基础及其必要性和合理性分析。为综述性部分,探究遗嘱处分财产限制立法的基本问题,对遗嘱处分财产的限制从公共利益和家庭伦理方面进行了合理性分析,为后文提供了相关的理论支撑。笔者首先介绍了遗嘱自由原则是继承制度的基本原则,概括了遗嘱自由原则的历史渊源。然后主要就遗嘱处分财产限制立法的理论基础,即自由与秩序说和自然法的规范意义说两种学说进行了制度阐述,对遗嘱处分财产的限制立法进行了必要性及合理性分析,为遗嘱处分财产的限制立法提供了理论基础。第二部分是大陆法系和英美法系国家在遗嘱处分财产限制立法方面的比较。通过对现代外国继承法中对遗嘱处分财产的限制立法进行比较分析研究,在学习国际某些领先理念来拓宽视野的同时,吸收某些较为完善的立法内容体系和较为成熟的立法技术。通介绍了大陆法系国家如法国,德国,日本,意大利和俄罗斯6个国家和英美法系在遗嘱处分财产方面限定的相关法律规定,对不同制度进行了比较和分析,归纳出两大法系国家在遗嘱处分财产限制立法方面的不同点和相同点。引出我国遗嘱继承处分财产限制方面的相关内容。第三部分概述了我国遗嘱处分财产限制立法的现状、不足及完善。我国《继承法》第19条对遗嘱自由做了限制,遗嘱应当对缺乏劳动能力又没有生活来源的继承人保留必要的遗产份额,遗产处理时,应当为该继承人留下必要的遗产,所剩余的部分才可以参照遗嘱确定的原则处理。对我国遗嘱处分财产的限制立法进行分析,指出我国遗嘱处分财产方面限制立法方面的不足：我国继承法规定的必留份,请求权主体过窄；我国继承法的标准过低；我国必留份制度可操作性不强,使得遗产不利于发挥对家庭的抚养职能；对胎儿利益的保护不足；遗赠的执行和接受的权利和义务方面的规定不足。在此基础上提出了完善建议：增设特留份,完善必留份,完善胎儿的预留份制度,完善我国的遗赠制度。更多还原

【Abstract】 In October1,1985The Sixth National People’s passed the "law of succession", but aw of succession’s development falls behind the rhythm of the times. Thirty years of reform and opening up, China’s law of succession has made considerable progress:the inheritance of the judicial interpretation; formulated the "rules" probate. However, in these27years past, great changes have taken place in China’s economic, political, cultural, educational, scientific, health, labor and other fields. Especially after entering twenty-first Century, the steady growth of income of urban and rural residents, residents in possession of durable consumer goods increase, expanding residential area, unceasingly, living environment improved, the law updated concept of inheritance.The principle of freedom of testamentary succession of citizens is the embodiment of autonomy in private law field. Giving the freedom can make the lawful private property of citizens are better protected. Any freedom is not unlimited freedom. The freedom of testament industry is not absolute freedom, because the testamentary succession not only relates to heirs and be inherited people’s interests, but also relates to the state and the interests of the third party. This requires defining the principle of freedom of will, as far as possible while maintaining good individual interests and safeguard social and national interests. The testamentary disposition property limits is a manifestation of defining the principle of freedom of will.At present the study on the inheritance system has achieved a lot. But these results are based on China’s "Inheritance Law" and the practical problems exist as the research object, the heritage of the sanction restrictions and some defects and shortcomings. Analysis of previous research based on this paper, from the perspective of comparative analysis on various aspects of heritage punishment legislative restrictions are described, and I put forward improvement suggestions.In addition to the introduction and conclusion, this paper is composed of three parts, a total of about thirty thousand words.The first part is the theoretical basis and the necessity and is the theoretical basis and the necessity and rationality analysis of testamentary disposition property restriction, legislation. For this part, the basic problem of testamentary, disposition property restrictions on testamentary disposition of property legislation, the limitation of the analysis of rationality from the public interests and the family ethics provides theoretical support for the. The author firstly introduces the principle of freedom of will is the basic principle of succession system, summarizes the historical origins of the principle of freedom of will. Then the main theoretical basis of testamentary disposition property restriction and legislation, namely the normative meaning of freedom and order and the natural law of the two theories are introduced to dispose of property system, will limit legislation analyzes the rationality and necessity, provide a theoretical basis for legislative restriction.The second part is the comparison of continental law system and Anglo-American law system in the legislative restrictions will dispose of property. Through the modern foreign inherited restrictions on testamentary disposition of property law legislation comparative analysis of the study, in the study of international some of the leading ideas to broaden the vision at the same time, the legislation technology and absorbing some relatively perfect legislation system and mature. Through the introduction of the civil law countries such as France, Germany, Japan, the relevant provisions of the law of Italy and Russia,6countries and Anglo-American law system in the testamentary disposition property limited, the different systems are compared and analyzed, summed up the two legal system countries limit the different legislation and the same point in the testamentary disposition. China leads the testamentary succession to dispose of property restrictions related to the contents.The third part summarizes our testamentary disposition property restrictions legislation present situation, deficiency and improvement. China’s "Inheritance Law" the nineteenth freedom of the will to do, will also no source for a successor to retain necessary share of heritage, heritage treatment, should leave the necessary for the heir to the legacy, the remaining part can reference will determine the principle of treatment. On our testamentary disposition property limits the legislative analysis, pointed out the limitations of the legislation of our country will dispose of property:China’s inheritance law reserved portion, narrow subject of claim right; low standards of China’s law of succession; China will leave a system operability is not strong, the heritage is not to play on the family support function; inadequate protection of the obligations of the problem. On the basis of the proposed recommendations for improvement interests of the fetus; provisions bequest execution and accept the rights and obligations of the problem. On this basis, I proposed recommendations for improvement. Such as adding the legitim, perfecting necessary heirship, improving the reserve system of the fetus, improving our legacy system.更多还原