| dc.contributor | 國立政治大學法律學系 | en_US |
| dc.contributor | 行政院國家科學委員會 | en_US |
| dc.creator (作者) | 陳洸岳 | zh_TW |
| dc.date (日期) | 2011 | en_US |
| dc.date.accessioned | 26-十一月-2012 09:38:07 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.available | 26-十一月-2012 09:38:07 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.issued (上傳時間) | 26-十一月-2012 09:38:07 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.identifier.uri (URI) | http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/55923 | - |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | 本計畫係為建構解決因金錢借貸契約與金融商品之販賣所引發爭議之架構。前者之問題主要在於，金錢借貸契約在理論上應有預約、諾成及要物三種類型，但學說實務卻多集中於要物性之檢討。究竟預約及諾成契約在如何之情形下始成立、二者間如何區別等，因其涉及當事人間之權利義務，實有深入探討之必要。同時，為擔保借款之清償，有無就普通存款債權設質之可能，在理論及實務上亦為一頗值探討之課題。另外，就所謂之「限額融資契約」，其內容依當事人間之約定而多樣化。在基礎契約成立後，針對當事人間之權利義務如何確立（例如貸方得否拒絕借方之借款請求）？其與各次獨立發生之消費借貸契約之關係如何？等問題，探究現行民法法理之適用可能性有其重要性。至於金融機構（受任人）對因販賣金融商品而致相對人發生損害時之賠償責任，目前雖傾向於以違反資訊提供義務、說明義務等作為歸責依據，但如比較委任契約下之受任人及信託關係中之受託人之善管義務，檢討二者在性質及內涵上之異同，不無確立受任人亦或負有為相對人之利益為最大考量之義務的可能。本研究將分析整理上述課題相關之實際契約及實務判決，參酌我國與日本法及部分美國法之學說理論，建構以民法法理為基礎之解決途徑。 | en_US |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | This research focuses on constructing resolutions for disputes about loan contract and money management contract. As to the former, theoretically there are three types of the formation of loan contract: by reservation, by oral/written agreement or by delivery of money. However most of the discussions concentrate only on the last issue. Because it influences the parties’ right severely, to search for the requisite for the others becomes important also. Meanwhile, in order to assure paying the debts, searching into the possibility of taking an ordinary deposit as security is interesting. Furthermore, according to the parties’ agreement, so-called commitment line contract shows diversity. After the main contract has been formed, to search for how to apply civil law’s principles to the relationship between the main contract and every separated sub-contract is important. As to the rationality of a financial institution(entrustee)’s responsibility for money management contract, it usually refers to the duty to inform or the duty of disclosure. However, by comparing the duty of care or fiduciary between an entrustee and a trustee, it also may lead out some hint to construct a trustee’s duty to highly concern his client’s interest. In order to achieve the goals of this research, it will be aimed at analyzing contracts and decisions concerning issues mentioned above, also it will refer to the development of Taiwan and Japan’s theories. | en_US |
| dc.language.iso | en_US | - |
| dc.relation (關聯) | 基礎研究 | en_US |
| dc.relation (關聯) | 學術補助 | en_US |
| dc.relation (關聯) | 研究期間:10008~ 10107 | en_US |
| dc.relation (關聯) | 研究經費:444仟元 | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 斷定的判斷;不實表示;說明義務;撤銷;損害賠償責任;適合性原則;自我責任原則;善管義務;忠實義務;信任義務 | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | assertion;misrepresentation;duty to inform;revocation;damages;suitability doctrine;self decision-making;duty of care;loyalty;fiduciary | - |
| dc.title (題名) | 金融服務契約之新興爭議與解決途徑之建構 (II) | zh_TW |
| dc.title.alternative (其他題名) | To Construct Resolutions for New Type Disputes about Financial Deals | en_US |
| dc.type (資料類型) | report | en |
