本文選題：分包商 + 建設(shè)工程優(yōu)先受償權(quán)��； 參考：《吉林大學》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：為了解決建設(shè)工程存在的嚴重拖欠工程款問題,合同法第286條規(guī)定了建設(shè)工程優(yōu)先受償權(quán)制度。至該法生效以來,理論分歧、實務紛爭始終未止,其中,合同法第286條的適用主體便是焦點之一。建設(shè)工程優(yōu)先受償權(quán)涉及的主體包括發(fā)包商、總包商、分包商、實際施工人、各方雇傭的工作人員、材料供應商等,本文的研究重點在于分包商及因分包合同無效而取得實際施工人身份之主體的建設(shè)工程優(yōu)先受償權(quán)的有無、實現(xiàn)途徑等幾個問題。體例上,本文除引言、結(jié)論之外分三部分:第一部分建設(shè)工程分包商優(yōu)先受償權(quán)概述,首先談及分包商適用建設(shè)工程優(yōu)先受償權(quán)問題的學界分歧,在該分歧上再分析原因,提出對我國分包體系認識的不足是產(chǎn)生爭議的一個重要原因,并基于此對我國分包體系進行重新梳理,把我國分包分為施工專業(yè)分包(簡稱專業(yè)分包)、勘察設(shè)計分包、裝飾裝修分包、勞務分包等幾類。最后,在比較法上介紹國外相關(guān)立法的規(guī)定,得出如今很多先進國家支持分包商享有建設(shè)工程優(yōu)先受償權(quán)的結(jié)論。第二部分建設(shè)工程分包商優(yōu)先受償權(quán)的成立及分析,旨在討論各類分包商的建設(shè)工程優(yōu)先受償權(quán)有無。專業(yè)分包商享有建設(shè)工程優(yōu)先受償權(quán),因為根據(jù)現(xiàn)行有關(guān)法律規(guī)范可以分析得出發(fā)包商已經(jīng)介入分包合同的事實,以此得到合同相對性原則在建設(shè)工程合同中被突破的結(jié)論。此外,本文還從立法目的、公平正義及效率的法律價值、增值理論等角度分別加以論述,以支持專業(yè)分包商的建設(shè)工程優(yōu)先受償權(quán)。勘察、設(shè)計分包商無建設(shè)工程優(yōu)先受償權(quán),從法條解釋、立法目的、契約關(guān)系等角度即可得出該結(jié)論。勞務分包商無建設(shè)工程優(yōu)先受償權(quán),因其無必要、無理由、無一定要具有建設(shè)工程優(yōu)先受償權(quán)的制度目的,其債權(quán)可以通過工資優(yōu)先權(quán)優(yōu)先保護。分包合同無效的實際施工人無建設(shè)工程優(yōu)先受償權(quán),因建設(shè)工程優(yōu)先受償權(quán)依合同產(chǎn)生,且具有強大的對抗效力,實際施工人不能也不適合適用建設(shè)工程優(yōu)先受償權(quán),其債權(quán)可以依據(jù)《建設(shè)合同解釋》第2條、第25條、第26條得到主張,并且可以通過添附后對發(fā)包商主張不當?shù)美埱髾?quán)得以實現(xiàn)。第三部分建設(shè)工程專業(yè)分包商優(yōu)先受償權(quán)的實現(xiàn)路徑。該部分首先分析專業(yè)分包商在享有建設(shè)工程優(yōu)先受償權(quán)情況下建設(shè)各方的權(quán)利沖突,在此基礎(chǔ)上分析認為其享有建設(shè)工程優(yōu)先受償權(quán)的條件是向發(fā)包商申報及登記;為保障總包商利益進而提出總包商可通過專業(yè)分包商建設(shè)工程優(yōu)先受償權(quán)的放棄或分包工程款已清償以對分包商建設(shè)工程優(yōu)先受償權(quán)提出抗辯;此外,本部分還分析了分包商優(yōu)先受償權(quán)的擔保范圍及優(yōu)先序列;最后論述專業(yè)分包商建設(shè)工程優(yōu)先受償權(quán)的實現(xiàn)路徑。
[Abstract]:In order to solve the problem that the construction project is in serious arrears, Article 286 of the contract Law stipulates the system of the priority right of payment of the construction project. Since the law came into effect, there have been theoretical differences and disputes in practice. Among them, the subject of Article 286 of contract Law is one of the focal points. The subjects involved in the priority right of compensation for construction projects include the contractor, the general contractor, the subcontractor, the actual constructor, the staff employed by the parties, the material supplier, etc. The research focus of this paper is on whether the subcontractor and the subject who obtains the actual constructor's status as the actual constructor has the right of priority compensation and how to realize the right of subcontractor and the subject who obtained the actual constructor status because of the invalidation of the subcontract and so on. In style, this paper is divided into three parts in addition to the introduction and conclusion: the first part is an overview of the priority right of subcontractors in construction projects. Firstly, it discusses the academic differences in the application of priority compensation rights in construction projects by subcontractors, and then analyzes the reasons for the differences. It is pointed out that the lack of understanding of China's subcontracting system is an important reason for the controversy, and based on this, the subcontracting system of our country is reorganized, and the subcontracting of our country is divided into construction subcontracting (for short, professional subcontracting, survey and design subcontracting). Decoration and decoration subcontracting, labor subcontracting and other categories. Finally, this paper introduces the relevant legislation of foreign countries in comparative law, and draws the conclusion that many advanced countries support the subcontractors to enjoy the right of preferential compensation for construction projects. The second part is about the establishment and analysis of the construction subcontractor's priority right of compensation, aiming at discussing the existence or not of the construction project priority right of all kinds of subcontractors. Professional subcontractors enjoy the right to be compensated first in construction projects, because according to the existing relevant legal norms, the fact that the contractor has already intervened in the subcontract can be analyzed, and the conclusion that the principle of relativity of contract has been broken through in the construction contract can be obtained. In addition, this paper also discusses the legislative purpose, the legal value of fairness, justice and efficiency, and the theory of value-added, in order to support the professional subcontractors' priority of compensation for construction projects. This conclusion can be obtained from the angle of interpretation of law, legislative purpose, contract relationship, etc. The labor service subcontractor does not have the construction project priority compensation right, because it is unnecessary, has no reason, does not necessarily have the construction project priority compensation right system purpose, its creditor's rights may be protected by the salary priority. The actual constructor who is invalid in the subcontract does not have the prior right to be reimbursed for the construction project. Because the priority of the construction project comes into being according to the contract and has a strong antagonistic effect, the actual constructor cannot and is not suitable for the application of the right of priority payment of the construction project. The creditor's rights can be claimed according to Article 2, Article 25, Article 26 of Construction contract interpretation, and can be realized by adding additional documents to claim the right of unjust enrichment against the contractor. The third part is the way to realize the priority of subcontractors in construction engineering. In this part, the author first analyzes the conflict of rights of professional subcontractors under the condition that they enjoy the priority of compensation for construction projects. On the basis of the analysis, the author thinks that the condition for the professional subcontractors to enjoy the priority of compensation for construction projects is to declare and register to the contractors. In order to protect the interests of the contractor and then propose that the contractor may, through the waiver of the priority of the construction project of the professional subcontractor or the payment of the subcontract, raise a defense against the priority of the subcontractor in the construction of the project; in addition, This part also analyzes the scope and priority sequence of the subcontractor's priority right of payment, and finally discusses the way to realize the priority right of the professional subcontractor's construction project.
【學位授予單位】：吉林大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D923.6

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 陳信勇;;建設(shè)工程價款優(yōu)先受償權(quán)放棄行為的效力分析[J];浙江社會科學;2016年02期

2 林镥海;酈煜超;袁曉波;洪玉霞;;放棄“建設(shè)工程價款優(yōu)先受償權(quán)”的效力[J];中國律師;2015年02期

3 孫科峰;楊遂全;;建設(shè)工程優(yōu)先受償權(quán)主體的爭議與探究——《合同法》第286條之分析[J];河北法學;2013年06期

4 馬新;白萍紅;;論《最高人民法院關(guān)于審理建設(shè)工程施工合同糾紛案件適用法律問題的解釋》第二十六條的理解與適用[J];佳木斯教育學院學報;2012年10期

5 崔建遠;;債權(quán)人代位權(quán)的新解說[J];法學;2011年07期

6 辜曉丹;;實際施工人界定之我見——對最高院法釋〔2004〕14號第26條之辨析[J];河南司法警官職業(yè)學院學報;2010年01期

7 宋愛琴;;建設(shè)工程分包合同相對性及相對性的突破——以一起建設(shè)工程分包合同糾紛案為例[J];城市道橋與防洪;2009年02期

8 蔡衛(wèi)忠;王明華;;論建設(shè)工程價款優(yōu)先受償權(quán)的主體[J];山東警察學院學報;2008年04期

9 張啟祥;;建設(shè)工程優(yōu)先受償權(quán)登記制度思考——兼論《合同法》第286條之立法不足與完善[J];法制與社會;2008年06期

10 張巍;;建設(shè)工程承包人優(yōu)先受償權(quán)之功能研究[J];北大法律評論;2005年02期

相關(guān)碩士學位論文 前2條

1 李逾婧;我國建設(shè)工程價款優(yōu)先受償權(quán)制度探析[D];西南政法大學;2013年

2 蔣玉鎖;論建設(shè)工程價款優(yōu)先受償權(quán)[D];山東大學;2007年

，

本文編號：1959006