發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-04-26 06:44

  本文選題：連帶債務(wù) + 類型化　； 參考：《中國(guó)政法大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：連帶債務(wù)是民事實(shí)體法中的古老制度,它立足于對(duì)債權(quán)人的充分保護(hù),賦予債權(quán)人以“運(yùn)用自如”的請(qǐng)求權(quán),同時(shí)又通過內(nèi)部求償權(quán)的設(shè)置,實(shí)現(xiàn)債務(wù)人責(zé)任的公平負(fù)擔(dān)。實(shí)體法中關(guān)于連帶債務(wù)的獨(dú)特規(guī)定,尤其是連帶債務(wù)人之間既相互牽連又各自獨(dú)立的關(guān)系,如何能夠在訴訟程序中得到充分地體現(xiàn)和運(yùn)用,直接影響到權(quán)利人權(quán)利的實(shí)現(xiàn)及義務(wù)人權(quán)益的保障。當(dāng)前學(xué)界對(duì)連帶債務(wù)訴訟形態(tài)的選擇存在不同意見,應(yīng)綜合考慮連帶債務(wù)的訴訟標(biāo)的、連帶債務(wù)的效力等因素,區(qū)分不同的連帶債務(wù)類型,分別采用類似必要共同訴訟和普通共同訴訟的形態(tài)。 不同的訴訟形態(tài)在程序的建構(gòu)和裁判的效力上會(huì)有很大的不同,類似必要共同訴訟側(cè)重連帶債務(wù)人之間的牽連性,某一連帶債務(wù)人的行為只要有利于全體,其效力及于全體,法院最終通過既判力主觀范圍擴(kuò)張的方式形成合一確定的判決；普通共同訴訟則更強(qiáng)調(diào)連帶債務(wù)人之間的獨(dú)立性,各連帶債務(wù)人可以分別行為和裁判,而效力不及于其他人。無論適用何種共同訴訟形態(tài),在構(gòu)建訴訟程序和作出訴訟裁判時(shí),都應(yīng)當(dāng)注意平衡連帶債務(wù)人之間的牽連性和獨(dú)立性：類似必要共同訴訟中不能忽視連帶債務(wù)人在當(dāng)事人適格等方面所具有的獨(dú)立性,普通共同訴訟則要強(qiáng)調(diào)對(duì)連帶債務(wù)人關(guān)于共同事實(shí)的一致認(rèn)定,通過證據(jù)共通原則和判決的反射效力,使各連帶債務(wù)人相互影響,避免矛盾裁判的出現(xiàn)。 本文以連帶債務(wù)在民事訴訟中的具體適用為研究對(duì)象,立足于國(guó)內(nèi)外學(xué)者的研究成果,嘗試進(jìn)行民事實(shí)體法和民事訴訟法的交叉研究,通過對(duì)訴訟標(biāo)的、證據(jù)共通原則、既判力等相關(guān)理論的運(yùn)用,對(duì)連帶債務(wù)訴訟問題作了較為細(xì)致的分析,綜合討論了連帶債務(wù)在民事訴訟中適用的全過程。 除引言和結(jié)語外,本文共分為四章： 第一章——連帶債務(wù)的概念與分類。本章主要從民事實(shí)體法的角度介紹連帶債務(wù)制度的概念、內(nèi)外部法律關(guān)系與分類,屬于研究連帶債務(wù)訴訟的理論鋪墊。 第二章——連帶債務(wù)在民事訴訟中的訴訟形態(tài)。介紹關(guān)于連帶債務(wù)訴訟形態(tài)的各種學(xué)說,通過對(duì)訴訟標(biāo)的、債務(wù)效力等訴訟形態(tài)影響因素的分析,提出按照連帶債務(wù)的不同類型,分別采用類似必要共同訴訟和普通共同訴訟的形態(tài)。 第三章——連帶債務(wù)在民事訴訟中的當(dāng)事人與證據(jù)。根據(jù)類似必要共同訴訟和普通共同訴訟形態(tài)的不同特點(diǎn),從當(dāng)事人與證據(jù)兩個(gè)方面,討論連帶債務(wù)在民事訴訟程序中的適用。 第四章——連帶債務(wù)在民事訴訟中的裁判與執(zhí)行。以類似必要共同訴訟和普通共同訴訟形態(tài)為基礎(chǔ),區(qū)分類別討論連帶債務(wù)的判決、調(diào)解與執(zhí)行,兼顧連帶債務(wù)人之間的牽連性和獨(dú)立性。
[Abstract]:Joint and several debt is an ancient system in civil substantive law, which is based on the sufficient protection of creditors, endows creditors with the right to claim freely, and at the same time realizes the fair burden of debtors' liability through the establishment of internal claims. The unique provisions of substantive law on joint and several liabilities, especially the relationship between joint and several debtors, how to be fully reflected and applied in the proceedings. It directly affects the realization of the rights of the obligee and the protection of the rights and interests of the obligor. At present, scholars have different opinions on the choice of litigation form of joint and several debts, and should consider comprehensively the object of litigation of joint and several debts, the effectiveness of joint and several debts, and distinguish the different types of joint and several debts. Use the form of similar necessary joint action and common joint action respectively. Different litigation forms will have great differences in the construction of procedure and the effectiveness of the adjudication. Similar to the necessary joint action, the joint action focuses on the implicability between the joint and several debtors. As long as the behavior of a joint and several debtor is beneficial to the whole, its effect is equal to that of the whole. The court finally forms the judgment determined by the expansion of the subjective scope of res judicata, while the common joint action emphasizes the independence of the joint and several debtors, each joint debtor can act and judge separately, but the effectiveness is not as good as the others. No matter what form of joint action is applicable, in constructing proceedings and making decisions, Attention should be paid to balancing the implication and independence between the joint and several debtors: the independence of the joint and several debtors, such as the suitability of the parties, cannot be ignored in necessary joint actions, The common joint action should emphasize the unanimous recognition of the common facts of the joint and several debtors, through the principle of common evidence and the reflective effect of the judgment, so that the joint and several debtors influence each other and avoid the appearance of the contradictory judgment. This article takes the concrete application of the joint and several debts in the civil action as the research object, based on the domestic and foreign scholars' research results, tries to carry on the cross-study of the civil substantive law and the civil procedure law, through to the lawsuit object, the evidence common principle, With the application of the theory of res judicata and other related theories, this paper makes a detailed analysis on the litigation of joint and several debts, and discusses the whole process of the application of joint and several debts in civil litigation. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, this paper is divided into four chapters: Chapter 1-the concept and classification of joint and several debts. This chapter mainly introduces the concept of joint and several debt system, internal and external legal relations and classification from the perspective of civil substantive law. Chapter two-Litigation form of Joint and several debts in Civil Litigation. This paper introduces various theories about the litigation form of joint and several debts, and puts forward the different types of joint and several debts according to the analysis of the influencing factors such as the object of litigation, the validity of debt and so on. Use the form of similar necessary joint action and common joint action respectively. Chapter III-the parties and evidence of joint and several debts in civil proceedings. According to the different characteristics of similar necessary joint action and common joint action, this paper discusses the application of joint debt in civil proceedings from the two aspects of parties and evidence. Chapter IV-the judgment and enforcement of joint and several debts in civil proceedings. On the basis of similar necessary joint action and common joint action, this paper discusses the judgment, mediation and enforcement of the joint debt, taking into account the implication and independence between the joint debtor and the joint debtor.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：中國(guó)政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D925.1;D923.3

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 肖建華;陳琳;;法官釋明權(quán)之理論闡釋與立法完善[J];北方法學(xué);2007年02期

2 王斌;李龍;李嬋;;民事訴訟標(biāo)的三大理論述評(píng)[J];重慶大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2008年02期

3 姜強(qiáng);;《侵權(quán)責(zé)任法》中的連帶責(zé)任、不真正連帶責(zé)任及其訴訟程序[J];法律適用;2010年07期

4 莊淑珍，，涂文忠;淺探連帶之債的執(zhí)行──兼談我國(guó)民事執(zhí)行立法的完善[J];法商研究(中南政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));1996年03期

5 尹田;;論民事連帶責(zé)任[J];法學(xué)雜志;1986年04期

6 江偉;韓英波;;論訴訟標(biāo)的[J];法學(xué)家;1997年02期

7 章武生;金殿軍;;案外人異議之訴研究[J];法學(xué)家;2010年05期

8 彭熙海;;論連帶責(zé)任案件的訴訟形式[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2012年03期

9 牟逍媛,金權(quán);論類似的必要共同訴訟在個(gè)案中的適用——一起連帶債務(wù)之訴的思考[J];法學(xué);2003年07期

10 胡震遠(yuǎn);;我國(guó)準(zhǔn)必要共同訴訟制度的建構(gòu)[J];法學(xué);2009年01期

本文編號(hào)：1804961