發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-04-17 19:45

  本文選題：祭奠權(quán) + 定性��； 參考：《遼寧大學(xué)》2015年碩士論文

【摘要】：伴隨著民眾法律保護(hù)意識的增強(qiáng),越來越多的新型化糾紛不斷出現(xiàn),給司法實(shí)踐帶來了越來越多的新挑戰(zhàn)。本文選取了近年來新興起的民事權(quán)益——“祭奠權(quán)”來進(jìn)行研究和討論�！凹赖鞕�(quán)”早在幾年之前就有人探討過,但是使用的概念是“祭奠利益”或者“祭奠權(quán)益”,即尚未將祭奠行為上升為一種類型化的權(quán)利。本文突破了原始觀念,直接將近親屬對逝者的祭奠行為上升為一種應(yīng)受法律保護(hù)的權(quán)利,并從三個(gè)大方面對“祭奠權(quán)”作了較為系統(tǒng)的論述。首先,本文通過李某、譚某訴王某祭奠權(quán)益糾紛一案,引出“祭奠權(quán)”糾紛在現(xiàn)實(shí)生活中的表現(xiàn)形式,并通過分析案例,得出祭奠糾紛案件的焦點(diǎn)問題有兩個(gè):第一,對于“祭奠權(quán)”這種沒有法律明確規(guī)定的新型化權(quán)利應(yīng)該如何定性;第二,法律應(yīng)該如何保護(hù)“祭奠權(quán)”,從而使這種新型化的民事權(quán)利具有可訴性。其次,通過對第一部分案例的系統(tǒng)分析,引出第二部分對“祭奠權(quán)”概念的定義,通過“祭奠權(quán)”的概念和特征進(jìn)一步分析出“祭奠權(quán)”的性質(zhì)應(yīng)該是一種身份權(quán),即近親屬基于身份關(guān)系對已故近親屬進(jìn)行追悼和哀思的權(quán)利,是依附于身份權(quán)而派生出來的附屬權(quán)利。最后,該部分是本文的核心和重點(diǎn),即法律如何保護(hù)“祭奠權(quán)”。第一,筆者分析了對“祭奠權(quán)”進(jìn)行保護(hù)的現(xiàn)實(shí)意義,并通過第二部分對“祭奠權(quán)”性質(zhì)的總結(jié)分析出“祭奠權(quán)”糾紛的請求權(quán)基礎(chǔ)是身份權(quán)請求權(quán);第二,通過列舉的形式對祭奠糾紛的類型進(jìn)行了總結(jié)并相應(yīng)的得出了祭奠侵權(quán)的責(zé)任承擔(dān)方式;最后,通過現(xiàn)行法律對“祭奠權(quán)”保護(hù)的不充分,筆者提出了自己的拙見。筆者認(rèn)為,目前將“祭奠權(quán)”納入法律中并無必要,也沒有可行性,我們完全可以通過從“祭奠權(quán)”的性質(zhì)入手來保護(hù)“祭奠權(quán)”,即將身份權(quán)進(jìn)行擴(kuò)大化解釋,從而將“祭奠權(quán)”涵蓋其中。這樣,在“祭奠權(quán)”發(fā)生糾紛時(shí),其請求權(quán)基礎(chǔ)順其自然歸結(jié)于身份權(quán)發(fā)生妨害請求權(quán),使得法院在審理“祭奠權(quán)”糾紛案件有法可依,從而使受害人的合法祭奠權(quán)益有了明確的法律保護(hù)。
[Abstract]:With the enhancement of people's consciousness of legal protection, more and more new disputes appear, which brings more and more new challenges to judicial practice.This paper selects the civil rights and interests-the right to sacrifice, which has emerged in recent years-to be studied and discussed."the right to sacrifice" has been discussed several years ago, but the concept used is "the right to sacrifice" or "the right to sacrifice", that is to say, the right to sacrifice has not been raised into a type of right.This article breaks through the primitive idea, and directly approaches the relatives' memorial service to the deceased to become a kind of right which should be protected by law, and makes a systematic discussion on the "right of memorial service" from three major aspects.First of all, through the case of Li Mou, Tan Mou v. Wang Mou's dispute over the right to sacrifice, this paper leads to the manifestation of the dispute of "the right to sacrifice" in real life, and through the analysis of the case, it concludes that there are two focal issues in the case of the dispute: first,How to characterize the "right of memorial service", which is not clearly stipulated by law, and how the law should protect the "right of memorial service" so as to make this new-type civil right justiciable.Secondly, through the systematic analysis of the first part of the case, the second part of the definition of the "right to sacrifice", through the concept and characteristics of the "right to sacrifice" further analysis of the nature of the "right to sacrifice" should be a kind of identity right.That is, the right of close relatives to mourn and mourn the deceased relatives based on the identity relationship is a subsidiary right derived from the right of identity.Finally, this part is the core and focus of this article, that is, how the law protects the right to sacrifice.First, the author analyzes the practical significance of the protection of the "right to sacrifice", and through the second part of the nature of the "right to sacrifice" summary and analysis of the "right of memorial service" dispute claim is based on the right to claim status; second,Through the enumeration of the form of the types of memorial disputes summarized and corresponding to the liability for the tort of memorial service to bear the way; finally, through the current law of "the right to sacrifice" inadequate protection, the author put forward his own humble opinion.The author thinks that it is not necessary and feasible to bring the right of memorial service into the law at present. We can protect the right of memorial service through the nature of the right of memorial service, that is to say, the right of identity should be expanded and explained.Thus, the right to sacrifice will be covered.In this way, when there is a dispute over the "right of memorial service", the basis of its right of claim naturally comes down to the right of impairing the claim of the right of identity, so that the court has a legal basis to abide by in the trial of the dispute case of the "right of memorial service".Thus, the legal rights and interests of victims have a clear legal protection.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：遼寧大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：D923

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 林來梵;駱正言;;憲法上的人格權(quán)[J];法學(xué)家;2008年05期

，

本文編號：1765015