《（民商法学专业论文）赠与人的法律责任研究》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《（民商法学专业论文）赠与人的法律责任研究（44页珍藏版）》请在金锄头文库上搜索。
1、 I 目目 录录 摘 要 Abstract 引 言1 一、赠与合同的主要特征2 （一）赠与合同是无偿合同 2 （二）赠与合同是单务合同 8 （三）赠与合同是诺成性合同11 二、赠与人的法律责任 15 （一）违约责任 15 （二）缔约过失责任 18 （三）损害赔偿责任26 三、赠与人的责任承担规则30 （一） 基于无偿性的责任承担规则30 （二） 基于单务性的责任承担规则31 结 论33 参考文献34 致 谢36 攻读硕士学位期间发表的学术论文目录37 II 摘摘 要要 作为典型的单务无偿合同，赠与合同在中华人民共和国合同法中有其特殊的地位,法律对其他无偿合同没有规定的，除合同性质不允许的以外，
2、可以适用赠与合同的有关规定,所以,对赠与合同的研究十分重要。 我国对赠与合同的研究起步较晚，其中有些重要问题还存在争议，例如对于赠与合同无偿性的理解，赠与合同是诺成性的还是实践性的？赠与财产应否属于赔偿范围？赠与人行使任意撤销权可能产生的法律责任以及赠与人违约责任的归责原则等等问题。 因为这些问题直接涉及赠与人的法律责任承担,关系重大，所以笔者将重点围绕这些问题展开论述。 首先阐述了赠与合同的法律特征。主要从两大法系考察了“对价”的概念，认为在我国理论上， “对价” （代价） 必定与财产利益有关， 而非泛泛的模糊概念，明确了对赠与合同无偿性的理解。对于赠与合同是诺成性还是实践性的问题，结合正反
3、两方观点，进行了综合比较分析，明确了赠与合同的诺成性。其次分别讨论赠与人可能存在的法律责任。第一，违约责任。通过正反两方面的比较，阐述了赠与人的违约责任应该遵从过错归责原则的理由。第二，缔约过失责任。谈到赠与人行使任意撤销权的缔约过失责任， 认为赠与人的缔约过失责任仍应坚持以过错为原则。第三，损害赔偿责任。文中分析了此种责任的性质以及赔偿范围等问题，认为在赠与人承诺赠与后赠与财产转移前,把赠与财产本身的损失视为受赠人的损失是不妥的。再次，分析了赠与人的责任承担规则。该问题对于赠与人的具体责任承担非常重要，但是相关的理论研究较少。文中主要根据赠与合同的无偿性和单务性的法律特征， 分别论述了适用于
4、赠与合同的无偿合同的责任承担规则和单务合同的责任承担规则。 总之，笔者针对和赠与人责任承担相关的一些重要但存在争议的问题，展开论述，以期使赠与人对自己行为可能产生的法律责任心中有数，尽量减少道德遭遇法律的尴尬。当然，道德和法律冲突的最终解决，要建立在市场经济的不断完善和发展的基础之上,通过不断健全完善法制，最终促进社会的和谐发展。 关键词关键词：赠与合同；无偿性；任意撤销权；缔约过失责任；过错责任原则 III Abstract Donation contract as a single gift for the typical non-reimbursable contract has spe
5、cial status in the “Peoples Republic of China Law of contract”. If other gratuitous contracts dont require, besides the contract nature doesnt permit, may apply provision of donation contract, therefore, its very important to research donation contract. Its late for our country to research donation
6、contract, some important questions also have objection, for example regarding free nature of donation contract, and whether donation contract is promissory or practice? Should grant the property belong to the compensation scope? The donor exercises abolishes the legal liability nature which as well
7、as the donor willfully the power possibly produces breaks a contract the responsibility to turn over to questions and so on responsibility principle, but these questions directly involve donors legal liability to undertake. Therefore, the author will revolve these questions with emphasis, launch the
8、 elaboration, and draw the conclusion. Firstly, the article elaborates the legal characteristic of donation contract. Separately inspects the concept of “consideration” from two big legal systems the concept, thinks that in our country theoretically, benefit surely is connected with property to“cons
9、ideration”, be not general mixing up a concept, clear and definite pair of contracts of gift gratuitous understands. Regarding the question about promissory is donation contract or practicality, has carried on the synthesis comparative analysis, and is clear about promissory of donation contract. Se
10、condly, discusses the legal liability which the donor possibly exists. First, violation responsibility. Through the pro and con two aspects comparisons, elaborates donors violation responsibility, should comply with the mistake file responsibility principle reason. Next, duty against contracting. Ta
11、lks about the random cancellation power, thinks that the donor conclude a treaty the neglect duty still to insist take the mistake as the principle. Finally, the damage compensates responsibility. In the article has analyzed this questions and so on responsibility nature as well as compensation scop
12、e, thinks that in the donor pledged presented as a gift before granted the property shift, granted IV propertys loss regards as donees loss is improper. Thirdly, analyze donors responsibility to undertake the responsibility. The issue is very important, but the correlation theories research is few.
13、According to the main text of the donation contract, free and single works feature of the law, this describes respectively applicable to the contract of free gifts contract liability rules for the contract and single-liability rules. In brief, the author analyzes some important but controversial iss
14、ues, launches expositions given conclusion with a view to everyone with a view to everyone free of charge as a gift to their own actions may be aware of the legal responsibility, as far as possible minimize moral encountered legal embarrassment. Certainly, moral and the legal conflicts final solution, must baste on the development of
