检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:陈伟[1] Chen Wei(School of Law Fuzhou University, Fuzhou Fujian 350116, China)
出 处:《北京化工大学学报(社会科学版)》2017年第2期24-29,共6页Journal of Beijing University of Chemical Technology(Social Sciences Edition)
摘 要:婚姻法及学界在认定夫妻共同债务时往往将其范围局限在合同之债。之所以界定得如此狭窄,其根源在于学者和立法者存在认识上的误区——除合同外的债务均与夫妻共同生活无关。事实上侵权、不当得利之债以及无因管理之债并非完全与夫妻共同生活无关,这是一个复杂的经验问题而非简单的逻辑问题。此种认识误区,不但破坏债法体系的完整性,而且脱离司法实践,同时还忽略婚姻法的家庭伦理属性。婚姻法应当在综合考虑债务是否与共同生活相关、债务人过错以及婚姻存续状况等因素的基础上综合考察夫妻共同债务的范围。At present, Marriage Law and the academic circles often confine the marital common debt to the scope of the contract. The reason why the marital common debt is so narrow is that scholars and legislators misunderstand in cognition that all debts except contract debts have nothing to do with the common life of the couple. In fact, the tort, unjust enrichment and negofiorum gestio are not entirely unrelated with the common life of the couple, which is a complex problem of experience instead of a simple logic problem. The misunderstanding can not only destroy the integrity of the debt law system, but also break away from the judicial practice, and even ignore the family ethics of the marriage law. The Marriage Law should examine the scope of the marital common debt on the basis of comprehensive consideration of the following factors: relationship between debt and common life, the fault of the debtor and the marital status.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.15