不当得利中无法律上原因之证明责任分配研究  

The Research about Distribution of Burden of Proof of No Legal Reason in Unjust Enrichment

作　　者：李磊[1] 

机构地区：[1]西南政法大学,重庆400031

出　　处：《河南省政法管理干部学院学报》2011年第4期168-174,共7页Journal of Henan Administrative Institute of Politics and Law

摘　　要：由于对不当得利制度和证明责任理论研究的不足,不当得利纠纷中证明责任的分配问题一直是我国司法实践中的一个难题。不当得利中无法律上原因的证明责任分配应遵循如下原则:在给付型不当得利中,如给付目的之基础法律关系根本不存在,由受利益人对其受益有法律上原因负证明责任;如给付目的之基础法律关系曾经存在,而其后不存在,则由受损害人对受利益人之受益无法律上原因负证明责任。在非给付型不当得利中,唯对于因受损害人的非给付行为所致的强迫得利,由受损害人对受利益人之受益无法律上原因负证明责任;此外则不区分财产利益变动是否基于受损害人之行为,一律由受利益人对其受益存在法律上原因负证明责任。Because of the burden of proof of unjust enrichment system and the lack of theoretical research, unjust enrichment dispute the allocation of the burden of proof in judicial practice in China has been a problem. No law of unjust enrichment because the burden of proof allocation should follow the following principles ： payment type in unjust enrichment, such as the payment basis for the purpose of the legal relationship does not exist, by the people by the interests of the beneficiaries have a legal reason for their negative burden of proof; as the basis for the purpose of payment of the legal relationship ever existed, and then does not exist, the injured person from the benefit of the people by the interests of the reasons for negative without proof of legal responsibility. Type in non-payment of unjust enrichment, the only person for non-payment due to damage caused by acts of forced profit by the interests of people injured by the benefit of no legal reason for a negative proof;also not distinguish between property interests whether changes in behavior based on the injured person, all to benefit from the existence of their people by the interests of the legal burden of proof on the reasons for the negative.

关 键 词：给付型不当得利 非给付型不当得利 无法律上原因 证明责任 规范说 

分 类 号：D923.9[政治法律—民商法学]