查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 信託法之二面性--強行法規與任意法規之界線=The Nature of Trust Law: The Line to Demarcation between Mandatory Rules and Default Rules |
---|---|
作 者 | 王志誠; | 書刊名 | 政大法學評論 |
卷 期 | 77 2004.02[民93.02] |
頁 次 | 頁163-205 |
分類號 | 563.32 |
關鍵詞 | 強行法規; 任意法規; 信託終止; 自益信託; 他益信託; 公益信託; 信託法; 統一信託法典; Mandatory rules; Default rules; Termination of trust; Non-charitable trust; Charitable trust; Trust law; Uniform trust code; UTC; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 觀諸我國現行信託法雖就信託關係之特定內容、效力、變更及終止等事項,在諸多相關條文中明定得以信託行為得另有訂定,以排除適用信託法所設定之標準規範,而使信託法具有相當程度之任意法規性,但如信託法中未明文規定,是否即應認為信託行為不得另行訂定有別於標準規範之信託條款,乃至於在不損及第三人之條件下,是否亦不得由信託關係人以合意、同意或其他方式,自由變更信託關係或內容,誠有疑義。此外,我國信託法中有關受託人之義務、責任及變更、信託關係之變更或終止、受益人之權利及保護等規定,是否亦應認定為強行法規,而不容依信託關係人之自由意思調整,乃立法論及解釋論上,均值深入探討之問題。反觀美國「統一信託法典」之發展動向,則基於促進信託之效率化及彈性化,而明定其相關條款原則上為任意法規,僅有關信託之成立要件、第三人之保護規定、法院之權限及受益人之基本權益規定等四種類型,始界定為強行法規之性質。有鑑於此,本文除先說明任意法規及強行法規之特性及功能,以釐清兩者之判定標準外,亦探比較法之研究方法,介紹美國「統一信託法典」之最新發展動向,並進而整理分析我國信託法所採取之規範模式及相關重要爭議問題,作為界定我國信託法性質之重要基礎。最後則從經濟分析之觀點,認為信託法乃市場經濟下之產物,其功能首在提供信託當事人一套標準規範,以減少交易成本及監督成本,因此本質上應為任意法規,僅於基於公共政策或公益之考量,始例外設有強行法規。並建議從信託效率化及彈性化之新政策觀點出發,重新檢視現行信託法所設強行法規之規範目的,以正確釐清任意法規與強行法規之界線。 |
英文摘要 | In current Trust Law, certain articles exist pertaining to particular rules and terminations, which allow special rules of the trust to exclude standard regulations stipulated by Trust Law, thereby undermining its status. However, the terms of the trust relationship may be different from standard regulations and could change the content or the legal relations by default rules not stipulated in the Trust Law. Furthermore, non-charitable trusts can make alterations in the trust relationship by agreement, consent or other modes on the condition that no damage would be done to a third party. Besides, regardless of the articles of trustees’ obligations, responses, diversions, changes or termination of the trust relationship, the appointee’s rights and protection are mandatory rules and can not be adjusted by non-charitable trusts and must be a question requiring legislation and explanation. Instead, relevant articles according to the Uniform Trust Code were issued for the purposes of efficiency and flexibility as default rules with the exception of four kinds: elements of the trust, protection to the third party, the court’s privilege and the fundamental right of non-charitable trusts. Therefore the differences between mandatory rules and default rules and standards, as well as the Uniform Trust Code’s latest development will be introduced by using a comparative method; more relevant issues in Trust Law will be analyzed in order to qualify content and position. Finally, Trust Law is from the free market and its function provides parties modified rules in relation to cost. So mandatory rules should be the exception, which are under the consideration of public policy. Also mandatory rules in the Trust Law should be examined again in terms of efficiency and flexibility to demarcate the line separating them. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。