本文關(guān)鍵詞： 動(dòng)產(chǎn)物權(quán) 意思自治 物之所在地法　出處：《寧波大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：我國2010年《涉外民事關(guān)系法律適用法》對動(dòng)產(chǎn)物權(quán)的法律適用問題進(jìn)行了專門規(guī)定,填補(bǔ)了相關(guān)的立法空白,并因引入了當(dāng)事人意思自治原則而引起了極大關(guān)注�！拔餀�(quán)法定”是我國《物權(quán)法》的原則,關(guān)于在法律適用領(lǐng)域中當(dāng)事人的意思自治能否被采用以及能夠在多大程度上被采用的爭論,并未因相關(guān)規(guī)定的出現(xiàn)而終結(jié)。本文擬在分析動(dòng)產(chǎn)物權(quán)法律適用中引入當(dāng)事人意思自治原則的原因的基礎(chǔ)上,對我國動(dòng)產(chǎn)物權(quán)法律適用立法中對當(dāng)事人意思自治原則的具體規(guī)定進(jìn)行分析和評估,并嘗試梳理存在的問題和尋求解決問題的路徑及提出解決問題的建議。本文分為具有內(nèi)在邏輯聯(lián)系的三個(gè)部分:第一部分對動(dòng)產(chǎn)物權(quán)法律適用引入當(dāng)事人意思自治原則的原因進(jìn)行了分析。由于物之所在地有時(shí)候難以確定或者僅與有關(guān)動(dòng)產(chǎn)物權(quán)關(guān)系存在偶然的聯(lián)系,使得傳統(tǒng)物之所在地法原則的適用面臨挑戰(zhàn)。加之動(dòng)產(chǎn)物權(quán)領(lǐng)域本身存在著當(dāng)事人意思自治的空間,當(dāng)事人意思自治原則的適用存在著諸如能夠避免動(dòng)產(chǎn)因所在地變動(dòng)而導(dǎo)致準(zhǔn)據(jù)法的不確定、增強(qiáng)了當(dāng)事人對法律適用的合理預(yù)期并在物權(quán)變動(dòng)的情況下保持了合同準(zhǔn)據(jù)法的協(xié)調(diào)一致等優(yōu)勢,使得動(dòng)產(chǎn)物權(quán)領(lǐng)域考慮新的法律適用原則時(shí)當(dāng)事人意思自治原則成為一個(gè)必然的選擇。第二個(gè)部分對我國動(dòng)產(chǎn)物權(quán)法律適用立法中當(dāng)事人意思自治原則的具體規(guī)定進(jìn)行了闡述。在我國相關(guān)規(guī)定中,當(dāng)事人意思自治原則作為首要的法律適用原則被運(yùn)用于一般動(dòng)產(chǎn)物權(quán)和運(yùn)輸中的動(dòng)產(chǎn)物權(quán)的領(lǐng)域中,且采用的是與合同領(lǐng)域一樣的完全的當(dāng)事人意思自治原則。在意思自治的方式上是以明示為原則和以默示為例外。對運(yùn)輸中的動(dòng)產(chǎn)物權(quán),當(dāng)事人協(xié)議選擇的準(zhǔn)據(jù)法僅適用于物權(quán)變更問題,而對一般動(dòng)產(chǎn)物權(quán)則無此種限制而將其適用于所有動(dòng)產(chǎn)物權(quán)問題。第三個(gè)部分對我國動(dòng)產(chǎn)物權(quán)法律適用中當(dāng)事人意思自治原則的立法規(guī)定存在的缺陷及其完善進(jìn)行了論證。立法規(guī)定中采用完全的當(dāng)事人意思自治原則對當(dāng)事人意思自治的效力、當(dāng)事人選法范圍以及當(dāng)事人選擇的法律的適用范圍都缺乏必要的限制。針對立法規(guī)定的這種缺陷,在修法程序的啟動(dòng)并不現(xiàn)實(shí)的前提下,完全可以結(jié)合當(dāng)事人意思自治原則的運(yùn)用特點(diǎn)即需要一些可操作性的規(guī)范的配合,通過司法運(yùn)用中對當(dāng)事人意思自治原則的必要限制來予以克服,主要體現(xiàn)為:當(dāng)事人意思自治的時(shí)間應(yīng)當(dāng)限制在一審法庭辯論終結(jié)前;由于物權(quán)法定的限制,必須明確當(dāng)事人意思自治的效力只能及于物權(quán)爭議雙方的當(dāng)事人而不得對抗第三人;當(dāng)事人協(xié)議選擇法律應(yīng)以與爭議具有實(shí)際聯(lián)系為限且只能適用于物權(quán)變動(dòng)的問題而不能及于其他。此外,當(dāng)事人意思自治原則的適用還必須受到強(qiáng)制性規(guī)則的直接適用以及公共秩序保留制度的限制。
[Abstract]:In 2010, the Law on the legal Application of Foreign Civil Relations made a special provision on the legal application of movable property right, which filled the relevant legislative gaps. And because of the introduction of the principle of party autonomy, it has aroused great concern. "Real right Law" is the principle of "property Law" in our country. The debate as to whether and to what extent party autonomy can be adopted in the field of application of the law, This paper intends to analyze the reasons for the introduction of the principle of party autonomy in the application of the law on movable property. This paper analyzes and evaluates the specific provisions of the principle of party autonomy in the applicable legislation of the law on real property of movable property in our country. This paper is divided into three parts with inherent logic connection: the first part introduces the parties' intention to apply the law of movable property right. The reasons for the principle of governance are analyzed. Because the location of the property is sometimes difficult to determine or there is only a casual connection with the property right relationship of the movable property, This makes the application of the principle of the law of location of the traditional thing face a challenge. In addition, there is a space for the autonomy of the party's will in the field of real property of movable property. The application of the principle of party autonomy exists such as the ability to avoid uncertainty of applicable law due to changes in the location of movable property, Enhancing the parties' reasonable expectation of the application of the law and maintaining the harmonization of the applicable law of the contract in the case of the alteration of the real right, and so on. It is an inevitable choice to consider the principle of party autonomy in the field of real property right of movable property. The second part is the specific rules of the principle of party autonomy in the legislation of the application of law on real property of movable property in our country. In the relevant regulations of our country, As the primary principle of legal application, the principle of party autonomy has been applied in the field of general movable property and moveable real right in transportation. And it adopts the same complete principle of party autonomy as in the field of contract. In the way of autonomy of will, the express principle and implied principle are taken as the exception. The applicable law chosen by agreement of the parties is only applicable to the issue of alteration of real right, The third part is about the defects of the legislative provisions of the principle of party autonomy in the application of the law of movable property in our country and its perfection. The effect of adopting the principle of complete party autonomy on party autonomy in the legislative provisions has been demonstrated. The scope of the parties' choice of law and the scope of application of the law chosen by the parties lack the necessary restrictions. It can be fully combined with the characteristics of the application of the principle of party's will autonomy, that is, it needs some operable norms to cooperate, and it can be overcome by the necessary restriction of the principle of party's will autonomy in the judicial application. Mainly reflected as follows: the time of party autonomy should be limited before the conclusion of the debate in the court of first instance; due to the limitation of the property law, It must be made clear that the effect of party autonomy can only be extended to the parties to the dispute on property rights and not against the third party. The parties shall agree that the choice of law shall be limited to matters which have a practical connection with the dispute and which can only be applied to the question of alteration of property rights, and shall not be applicable to any other matter. The application of the principle of party autonomy must also be restricted by the direct application of mandatory rules and the reservation of public order.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：寧波大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D923.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 周后春;;物權(quán)沖突法中的意思自治與第三人利益保護(hù)——兼評《涉外民事關(guān)系法律適用法》第三十七條、第三十八條[J];河南財(cái)經(jīng)政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2014年06期

2 吳凡;;意思自治在我國動(dòng)產(chǎn)物權(quán)的適用空間[J];法制與經(jīng)濟(jì);2014年11期

3 梅傲;;論國際私法中意思自治原則的擴(kuò)張與限制——兼評《適用法解釋一》的相關(guān)規(guī)定[J];廈門大學(xué)法律評論;2014年01期

4 常鵬翱;;物權(quán)法定原則的適用對象[J];法學(xué);2014年03期

5 申衛(wèi)星;;物權(quán)法定與意思自治——解讀我國《物權(quán)法》的兩把鑰匙[J];法制與社會發(fā)展;2013年05期

6 許璐;;論意思自治于動(dòng)產(chǎn)物權(quán)法律適用中的限制[J];研究生法學(xué);2013年03期

7 杜煥芳;;論我國涉外物權(quán)法律適用的完善[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2013年02期

8 杜濤;;論物權(quán)國際私法中當(dāng)事人意思自治原則的限度——兼評《涉外民事關(guān)系法律適用法》第37條[J];上海財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2012年05期

9 許軍珂;;論當(dāng)事人意思自治原則在《涉外民事關(guān)系法律適用法》中的地位[J];法學(xué)評論;2012年04期

10 王勝明;;涉外民事關(guān)系法律適用法若干爭議問題[J];法學(xué)研究;2012年02期

，

本文編號：1515202