本文選題：民間借貸合同　切入點：主體　出處：《遼寧大學》2013年碩士論文

【摘要】：本文詳細論述了民間借貸合同的特點、作用和我國當前立法模式。在民間借貸合同特點方面，考慮到民間借貸合同這一稱呼主要是對比銀行借款合同來說，故采取了兩者對比論述的方法。在民間借款合同作用方面，本文全面論述了其積極作用和消極作用，認為總體而言利大于弊。同時，本文認為當前我國對于民間借貸合同規(guī)定的法律模式，可以稱之為錐形、二元化、管制型立法模式。這主要考慮到按法理學位階理論分析，法律文件效力分布呈錐形狀。現(xiàn)行對于民間借貸合同效力的直接性細則規(guī)定，采取了有效無效截然性劃分的二元化立法模式。在內(nèi)容上，法律強制性規(guī)定細化到許多本應由民間借貸合同當事人自主決定的部分。 在影響到民間借貸合同效力問題的主體資格問題上，本文認為我國現(xiàn)行法律規(guī)定并不完善。現(xiàn)行法律法規(guī)對于企業(yè)與企業(yè)之間的借款合同效力持否定態(tài)度，這既不符合法理也不符合現(xiàn)實需要。本文認為認可企業(yè)與企業(yè)之間的借款合同效力完全具有可行性。無論是地方內(nèi)部性規(guī)定，還是一些現(xiàn)行法律法規(guī)，對于企業(yè)與企業(yè)之間的借款合同效力都有著默許的態(tài)度，況且這更多屬于私法自治的范疇。對于自然人與企業(yè)之間的借款合同效力，目前有部分有效觀點、完全有效觀點和介于前兩者之間的觀點。本文認為當前對于此類合同分為合同有效和非法集資行為則有著現(xiàn)實的意義。另外，盡管對于村委會與村民之間借貸合同效力沒有法律明文規(guī)定，理論上也存在爭議，但是本文認為這兩者之間進行借貸有著法律與財務上的可行性。 在影響合同效力的利息問題上，理論上有著放開說、管制說和折中說三種觀點。放開說主張將利息問題作為市場問題看，同時列舉國外法律的放開性規(guī)定。管制說更多考慮到金融風險的存在。折中說的態(tài)度則介于兩者之間。事實上對于這一問題，立法者也很為難。這表現(xiàn)在關于單復利問題的司法解釋之間和法條之間的前后矛盾，，也表現(xiàn)在最高院與人民銀行對于高利貸的界定標準不同。本文認為利息管制不能簡單的“一刀切”解決，而應當根據(jù)不同的情況區(qū)別性規(guī)定利率高低。首先，充分發(fā)揮地方立法權的作用，不同經(jīng)濟條件的地區(qū)可以規(guī)定不同利率標準。其次，根據(jù)借貸用途不同，區(qū)分性規(guī)定生產(chǎn)性借貸、消費借貸和公益性借貸的利率標準。再次，區(qū)別規(guī)定收益性利息與處罰性利息。 在合同目的問題方面，本文從民間借貸實踐出發(fā)，結合合同法理論問題，作了詳細論述。本文反對現(xiàn)行關于民間借貸合同的二元化立法模式，對于民間借貸合同目的虛假的情況，本文不主張采取一刀切式的無效觀點，而將其依情況不同，分為自始無效、效力待定和部分無效的情況。對于合同資金實際用途與合同約定不符問題也應當根據(jù)實際情況區(qū)分合同有效或無效。
[Abstract]:This paper discusses in detail the characteristics, functions and current legislative model of the private loan contract. In terms of the characteristics of the private loan contract, considering that the term "folk loan contract" is mainly compared with the bank loan contract, Therefore, the author adopts the method of comparing the two methods. In the aspect of the function of folk loan contract, this paper comprehensively discusses its positive and negative effects, and thinks that the advantages outweigh the disadvantages in general. At the same time, This article thinks that the current legal model of the folk loan contract in our country can be called conical, dualistic and regulatory legislative model. The distribution of the validity of legal documents is cone-shaped. The current direct rules for the validity of private lending contracts have adopted a dualistic legislative model of dividing the validity and invalidity of diametrically. The mandatory provisions of the law are detailed to many parts that should be independently determined by the parties to private loan contracts. On the question of the subject qualification which affects the validity of the folk loan contract, this paper holds that the current laws and regulations of our country are not perfect, and the existing laws and regulations negate the validity of the loan contract between the enterprise and the enterprise. This is neither in line with legal theory nor with practical needs. This paper holds that the validity of loan contracts between enterprises is completely feasible. Whether it is local internal regulations or some existing laws and regulations, There is a tacit attitude towards the validity of loan contracts between enterprises, and this is more within the scope of private law autonomy. There are currently some valid views on the validity of loan contracts between natural persons and enterprises. This paper holds that there is realistic significance for such contracts to be divided into valid contracts and illegal fund-raising. Although there are no legal provisions on the validity of the loan contract between the village committee and the villagers, there are disputes in theory, but this paper believes that the loan between the two has legal and financial feasibility. On the issue of interest which affects the validity of the contract, there are three viewpoints in theory: liberalism, regulation and compromise. At the same time, it enumerates the liberalizing provisions of foreign laws. The regulation theory takes into account the existence of financial risks more. The compromise attitude is somewhere between the two. In fact, for this issue, Lawmakers are also in a difficult position. This is manifested in inconsistencies between the judicial interpretation of the issue of single compound interest and the provisions of the law. This article holds that interest control can not be simply "one-size-fits-all" solution, but should be based on different circumstances to specify the level of interest rate. First of all, To give full play to the role of local legislative power, different regions with different economic conditions can set different interest rate standards. Secondly, according to the different purposes of borrowing, differentiated rates of interest rates for productive lending, consumer borrowing and public welfare borrowing can be stipulated. Again, Distinguish between regulated interest on earnings and interest on penalties. In terms of the purpose of the contract, this paper discusses in detail from the practice of folk borrowing and combining with the theory of contract law. For the situation that the purpose of the folk loan contract is false, this article does not advocate adopting a one-size-fits-all view of invalidity, but divides it into original invalidity according to the situation. As to the actual use of the contract funds and the non-conformity with the contract agreement, the validity or invalidity of the contract shall be distinguished according to the actual circumstances.
【學位授予單位】：遼寧大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2013
【分類號】：D923.6

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前3條

1 宋魚水;無效合同的認定和處理[J];人民司法;1999年02期

2 張立先;;我國民間借貸法律風險及防范路徑研究[J];金融發(fā)展研究;2009年01期

3 周素彥;民間借貸:理論、現(xiàn)實與制度重構[J];山西財經(jīng)大學學報;2005年05期

相關碩士學位論文 前10條

1 曾紀勝;論我國民間借貸監(jiān)管制度的完善[D];西南政法大學;2011年

2 房蕾;論企業(yè)間借貸合同的效力及其風險防范[D];上海交通大學;2011年

3 田瑞云;我國民間借貸監(jiān)管及立法完善研究[D];蘭州商學院;2011年

4 宋洋;中國民間借貸利率管制法律路徑的檢討與重構[D];西南財經(jīng)大學;2011年

5 劉曉婭;淺析民間借貸的若干法律問題[D];西南政法大學;2011年

6 陳鍵;民間借貸管制制度的反思與重構[D];華東理工大學;2012年

7 崔昊;論民間借貸的法律規(guī)制[D];中國政法大學;2011年

8 莊文敏;我國民間借貸的監(jiān)管制度建構[D];西南財經(jīng)大學;2006年

9 聞永剛;民間借款合同的法律調(diào)整[D];延邊大學;2007年

10 李想;論民間借貸的法律監(jiān)管[D];大連海事大學;2012年

本文編號：1690832