【作者】 杨巍；

【导师】 温世扬；

【作者基本信息】 武汉大学 ， 民商法学， 2005， 硕士

【摘要】 诉讼时效的适用范围问题在我国民法学界一直存在争议。现有的观点主要是对具体的民事权利是否适用诉讼时效作个别的讨论,但是应当采取何种标准来判断民事权利是否适用诉讼时效,则缺乏深入的研究。本文力图从诉讼时效制度的目的和诉讼时效与有关权利期间的关系等问题入手,在重新认识诉讼时效制度的目的和准确把握诉讼时效与有关权利期间的关系的基础上,得出民事权利是否适用诉讼时效的具体标准。 本文共分六个部分。第一部分关于两个基本概念的取舍。该部分主要讨论应当采取“诉讼时效”概念还是采取“消灭时效”概念;应当采取“诉讼时效的适用范围”概念还是采取“诉讼时效的客体”概念。第二部分诉讼时效制度的目的——对传统学说的反思。该部分在分析、比较诉讼时效制度目的现有学说的基础上,提出了对“三目的说”的质疑,并阐述了本文对诉讼时效制度目的的观点。第三部分诉讼时效适用范围的意义。该部分主要讨论诉讼时效的适用范围在理论和实践上的意义;诉讼时效的适用范围与诉讼时效的效力的关系。第四部分诉讼时效适用范围的几种典型立法例及与我国立法的比较。该部分在分析、比较诉讼时效适用范围的几种典型立法例及成因的基础上,指出了我国现行立法对诉讼时效适用范围规定的不足。第五部分诉讼时效与债务履行期限的关系。该部分分析了债权与请求权的关系、诉讼时效与债务履行期限的关系。第六部分民事权利应否适用诉讼时效的判断标准。该部分提出了四个判断标准,即根据民事权利的性质判断,根据诉讼时效制度的目的判断,根据诉讼时效与有关权利期间的关系判断,根据社会现实和交易习惯判断。根据这些判断标准,本文最后得出结论,适用诉讼时效的民事权利,原则上应当是作为救济权的请求权。更多还原

【Abstract】 The application range of limitation of action has always been a question without conclusion in the civil law field of China. The current views are mainly being paid to the individual discussions on if limitation of action applies to a concrete civil right. But there is no a comprehensive research yet on what standard should be taken to judge if limitation of action applies to a civil right. This article, based on the purpose of limitation of action and the issues of relevant right period, aims to establish concrete standards for judging if limitation of action applies to a civil right, through re-studying the purpose of limitation of action and precisely grasping lawsuit time limit and relations of right limitations.This article consists of six parts. Part I is involved in the choice of two basic concepts: if concept of "limitation of action" or concept of "prescription" should be adopted; if concept of "application range of limitation of action" or "objective of limitation of action" be adopted. Part II describes the aim of system of limitation of action and the restudy to the traditional theory. Upon analysis and comparison over the existing theories on the system of limitation of action, questioning "the theory of tri-objectives", this part illustrate the points of view to the objective of the system of limitation of action . Part III describes the significance of the application scope of limitation of action. Part IV proposes some typical legislation examples and comparisons of China legislation. This part points out the deficiencies of current legislation on the application scope of limitation of action. Part V describes the relation between limitation of action and debts obligation limitation. This part analyzes relation between creditor’s right and right of claim as well as relation between limitation of action and debts obligation limitation. Part VI describes the judgment standard if limitation of action applies to civil right. This part proposes four judgment standards, namely, judging according to the properties of a civil right; judging according to the objective of the system of limitation of action , judging according to the relation of limitation of action andright period, and judgingaccording to the social reality and trade practice. In compliance with these judging standards, and based on the society reality and trade practice, this artlicle makes a conclusion that the civil right, to which limitation of action, should be considered in principle as right of claim for remedial right.更多还原