欧盟宪法草案对欧盟人权保护机制的影响 (The Draft Constitution and Human Rights Protection in European/周大勇

作者:法律资料网 时间:2024-05-15 17:56:43   浏览:9545   来源:法律资料网
下载地址: 点击此处下载

The Draft Constitution and Human Rights Protection in European Union

周大勇 (Zhou,Dayong)

1 the general introduction of the draft constitution in aspect of the human rights
2 short review of the human rights protection in European Union
3 the new points in aspect of human rights in the draft constitution
3.1 common values
3.2 incorporation of the Charter of fundamental rights
3.3 other changes could affect the human rights
4 arisen questions
4.1 the protection different from under the Convention
4.2 the two courts system and its application
5 conclusions in a historical view




1 general introduction of the draft constitution in aspect of the human rights

“Conscious that Europe is a continent that has brought forth civilization; That its inhabitants, arriving in successive waves from earliest times, have gradually developed the values underlying humanism: equality of persons, freedom, respect for reason” Extract from the preamble to the draft Constitution

In past 16 years, the European Union (EU hereafter) has marked itself through a series of changes. From The Single European Act, in which the Union committed itself to create a single market and at the same time establish on its territory the freedom of movement of people, goods, services as well as capital, to Maastricht Treaty, which brought the Union into reality and led to common foreign policy and cooperation in the area of justice and internal affairs as a higher level cooperation among Member States. Then the following Amsterdam (1997) and Nice (2001) Treaties, strengthened cooperation in foreign and security policy and placed Justice and Home Affairs matters and established the frame for the Union as a legitimate institution, in which people from different nations integrated in a large region would have common historical direction and splendid future before them. Just before the door of enlargement of the Union, it was argued that the Union has to improve democracy and transparency as well as efficiency, in order to outlines the EU’s purpose and competence clearly and streamline structures so as to prevent paralysis, therefore a new constitution for the Union is determined to replace the EU's series of key treaties in passed over the last 50 years as a single document .

Under leading of former French President and master draftsman Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, the European Convention set about its work of drafting the European Union's first ever full-fledged constitution. With the convention's work completed, the draft must now be finalized by an Intergovernmental Conference of European leaders that is expected to complete deliberations by the end of the 2003. As far as our topic is concerned, noticeably modifications come out in the constitution contract, first of all, the incorporation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which we will discuss later. In the beginning it is meaningful to consider the statues of the draft constitution in the progress course of the Union. The Union desires to bring peace and prosperity, to promote economic and social progress through continuously integrating market and expanding freedom under light of united institution and social systems . These goals, however, are the foundation of development and protection of human rights . That means, if we regard human rights as a series right which realized at first in peaceful and law-ruling society, then the Union has already kept on entrenching to appreciate these goal from beginning on, and now by means of perusing such goal in a larger region through enlargement, the EU’s influence extent to broader area and more people.

The draft constitution then in such context should be viewed as another historical phase in the process. Because the promoting of well-being and fortune of people depend not only on the development of economic situation and adding some single freedom clauses into the governmental documents, but also upon the entire politic system and background in which we live. Without governing based on democratic and effective institutional structure, and especially a ripe legislation and judiciary mechanism, the realization and protection of human rights could only be on the paper. This is also one of the motive caused the Declaration on the future of the European Union which committed the Union to becoming more democratic, more transparent and effective, in order to pave the way for a Constitution in response to the expectations of the people of Europe . In this perspective, one shall recognize the Constitution as a moving forward step of the whole EU institutionalization targeting its goal, so that to discuss the Constitution in connection with the human right protection, it is helpful to review the human rights protection in Europe and, especially in EU.

2 short review of the human rights protection in European Union

The protection of human rights has been internationally come to life in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 (UDHR) with reorganization of disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind and respect for inherent dignity as well as the equal rights of all members of the human. This declaration states explicitly that the rights and freedoms of humans have to be guaranteed without distinction and destruction by any group, state or person. These principles were broadly accepted by European countries, considering the origin of the EU (EC) and the historical separation in Europe after WWII, we denote only the contracting countries of European Community.

For the Member States of EC, the Council of Europe has been up to now the most important instrument, which established in 1949 as a result of the Congress of Europe in The Hague , and took for the basic of the human rights protection. The Council accepted the principles of Universal Declaration of Human Rights and integrated it into The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights (the Convention hereafter), which and its 12 Protocols turned out to be the significant resource for Human Rights protection in Europe. Because of the existence of the Convention, the other two organizations established in the same age aftermath of the Second World War, i.e. OEEC and the European Communities didn’t include relevant clauses for Human Rights protection into their founding treaties. Since it was agreed at that time, the Council of Europe would focus on the protection of human rights, fundamental freedoms and democratic values, whereas the OECD and the European Communities were to be concerned with the economic restoration of Europe. The reason of separate organizations was based on a view to avoiding economic excuses for future inhumanity. Another reason came from the thought, which believed that the process of economic integration set forth in the Community Treaties could not lead to a violation of human rights. Furthermore, the original Member States in the Treaty of Rome feared, that the inclusion of a "bill of rights" in the Treaty might have brought about an undesirable expansion of Community powers, since it could lead Community institutions to interpret their powers as extending to anything not explicitly prohibited by the enumerated guarantees.

Under the regime of Council of Europe, a lots of achievement of human rights improvement has been reached , yet along with the development and expansion of EU, another mechanism on protection of human rights which does not totally rely on the Council of Europe has derived out on one hand, on the other hand being lack of provisions ruling human rights protection in the Treaty establishing EC did not prevent the EC and the later European Union from providing care for the protection against the violations on human rights. Naturally, how could a swelling supranational organization as EC, which has been continually strengthening its power in all social aspects, does not involve in human rights issues especially when the consciousness of human rights nowadays become more significant both in international and national stages? Regarding to EU, The protection system has been formed in three aspects.

First of all, the legislation in the Member States of EU. Since there were no Member States of EU (EC) which accedes to the Community without being a member of the Council of Europe, and according to the Convention, it impose obligations on the Member States that they should ensure that the internal laws and practices comply with the human rights standards set out in the instruments. Very member states in EU have recognize the principles derived from the Convention and incorporated them somehow into national laws, most importantly, provided constitutive protection as the basic legal resource for human rights protection. For example in Germany, Basic Law (Grundgesetz) Art 1 to 19 deliver explicit provisions even beyond the Convention; the same case as Part VIII (§71-85) in Constitution of Denmark ; in Britain the Act of Human Rights came into force on 2 October 2000 steers extending a ways, in which the Convention can be used before domestic courts. Certainly, according to the classic human rights lessons, the basic protection of human rights could only be afforded at the national level through national legislation and excise of authoritative power.

Secondly, the institutions and legislation at the EU level acts also with high respect to the human rights protection. The EU has showed its commitment to human rights and fundamental freedoms and has explicitly confirmed the EU's attachment to fundamental social rights ever since its establishment.

The Amsterdam Treaty established procedures intended to secure their protection. It was ascertained, as a general principle, that the European Union should respect human rights and fundamental freedoms, upon which the Union is founded. For the first time a procedure is introduced, according to which severe and continuing violations of Fundamental Rights can lead to suspension of voting and other rights of a member state, if the Union determined the existence of a serious and persistent breach of these principles by that Member State. As to the Candidate countries, they should also respect these principles to join the Union. Furthermore, It has also given the European Court of Justice the power to ensure respect of fundamental rights and freedoms by the European institutions. In accordance with the inner requirement for the implementation of development cooperation operations, in order to reach objective of developing and consolidating democracy, EU also need its rule respecting for human rights. Such cases we have are for instance the EU Council’s regulation on human rights, Council Regulation (EC) No 975/199 and Council Regulation (EC) No 976/1999 for example, are aimed at providing technical and financial aid for operations to promote and protect of civil and political rights as well as economic, social and cultural rights etc.

Likewise, at their meeting in Cologne in June 1999, EU leaders declared that in respect to the current stage of progress of the European Union, the fundamental rights applicable at Union level should be pushed forward, namely be consolidated in a Charter and thereby made more evident. They argued, that the legal resources of human rights protection come from not only the European Convention of Human Right, but also from various international conventions drawn up by the Council of Europe as well as the United Nations and the International Labor Organization, they also include EU treaties themselves and from the case law of the European Court of Justice. As a result, a Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the Charter hereinafter) was sketch out, which highlighted the EU’s respect for human rights, for fundamental freedoms and for the principle of democracy through listing more rights a more precise definition of the common values comparing the early documents including the Convention. We will continue to concentrate on the Charter in point 3 since it has been integrated in the draft Constitution as an outstanding achievement.

Finally, the opinion and case-law of European Court of Justice (ECJ hereafter) also have immense impact on the establishment of the instrument of human rights protection within EU.

Although the jurisprudence developed by the ECJ recognizes the Convention as the standard-setter in cases in which the Court has to consider and decide a human rights issue, since there were no relevant legislation existed in the frame of the Community, the ECJ furnish itself power in this aspect by means of case-law. Earlier in 1974, the ECJ first made reference to the ECHR in the Nold judgment, in which the ECJ emphasized its commitment to fundamental human rights based on the constitutional traditions of the Member States’ fundamental rights form an integral part of the general principles of law which the Court enforces. In assuring the protection of such rights, the Court is required to base itself on the constitutional traditions common to the Member States and therefore could not allow measures, which are incompatible with the fundamental rights recognized and guaranteed by the constitutions of such States. The ECJ declared, that the international treaties on the protection of human rights in which the Member States have cooperated or to which they have adhered could also supply indications which may be taken into account within the framework of Community law.

That implied, even without clear regulations in the treaties, the remedy against violation on human rights could also be provided within the framework of the Community in respect for the common traditions applied to the Member States, and in connection with we have mentioned about the Member States’ above, the principles and resource applied to the Member States derived from the Council of Europe. Thus a EU standard could be established by transform a rating comparison of the members’ legal systems to the case-law in ECJ in respect for human rights.
下载地址: 点击此处下载
法律、规则与惯例的冲突与和谐
-评《最高人民法院关于审理期货纠纷案件若干问题的规定》

胡茂刚


为了正确审理期货纠纷案件,最高人民法院根据有关法律、行政法规的规定,结合审判经验,于6月23日公布了《最高人民法院关于审理期货纠纷案件若干问题的规定》(下简称为规定),自7月1日起正式施行。期货业期盼已久的司法解释的实施,宣告作为审理期货纠纷案件主要司法依据的《最高人民法院关于审理期货纠纷案件座谈会纪要》(下称纪要)历史使命的终结,一个全新的与时俱进的“规范、客观、公正、合理”的新司法解释的诞生。通读全文,《规定》无愧于期货市场各方参与者的“法律护身符”。
一、《规定》是发展规范期货市场的“助推器”
1、《规定》的出台,是对期货市场进入发展规范新阶段的进一步的法律确认。回顾《座谈会纪要》(成都会议)在95年10月颁布的背景,我们不难发现:期货市场在不同时期的规范程度影响国家对市场发展的决心与信心,这种决心与信心必将通过包括条例、管理办法及司法解释在内的期货法律体系来贯彻和体现。期货交易模式自90年代初期引进我国开始发展非常迅猛,由于政府对市场的发展缺乏长远规划,期货业在起步时就与证券业走上完全不同的发展道路。证券市场“边发展边立法”,证券业的第一个行政法规《股票发行与交易管理暂行条例》93年就颁布。期货市场“先发展后立法”,期货业的第一个行政法规《期货交易管理暂行条例》迟至近10年才出台。政策制定的偏见、政府监管的缺位、期货法制的空白、风险意识的欠缺造就了市场的混乱与失序,期货市场三分之二的时间是在治理整顿的恶梦中度过的。从93年到99年七年间,国务院及政府主管部门出台了40个关于整顿期货市场的一系列规范性文件,其中93-95年两年之间占了近30个。法律的首要功能在于安全与规范,最高人民法院出台的《纪要》不可能回避治理整顿的背景。《纪要》注重通过对期货经纪公司责任的追究来强化规范意识,这从制定的指导思想可见一斑:公正、及时审理期货市场盲目、无序状态下所形成的期货纠纷案件,制裁非法交易行为,维护正常的期货市场秩序。
以《期货交易所管理办法》、《期货经纪公司管理办法》为契机,《规定》的出台顺应了期货市场发展的新形势,强化了人们对市场发展的信心。一方面,在指导思想上,《规定》把保护当事人的合法权益置于维护期货市场秩序之前,这标志者司法理念的一个重大转变,由通过立法规范市场稳定为历史使命转变为通过立法服务发展市场为首要职责。另一方面,《规定》内容丰富,涵盖了期货市场的主要法律关系和法律环节,覆盖了管辖权、责任主体、无效合同责任、交易行为责任、透支交易责任、强行平仓责任、实物交割责任、保证合约履行责任、侵权行为责任、举证责任等13个部分。
2、《规定》是司法解释必须服从和服务于更高效力的法律和行政法规的需要。
从当代中国法的渊源来看,主要表现为以宪法为核心的各种制定法,法律体系效力高低依次为宪法、基本法律、基本法律以外的普通法律、行政法规、地方性法规(民族自治法规、经济特区的规范性文件)、规章、特别行政区法律、司法解释、国际条约和国际惯例等。从法理和法制统一的角度来看,法律、行政法规具有普适性效力,任何司法解释或者纪要都不能与处于上位的法律、行政法规相违背和抵触,否则无效。《纪要》颁布的背景正是专门期货法律、行政法规空白的情况下,在民法通则、经济合同法的旧框架内依据国务院关于整顿期货市场的文件、行规制定的。进入99年后,期货市场的法律环境发生了巨大变化,除了《民法通则》继续适用外,《合同法》以及最高院关于合同法的解释、《条例》、《管理办法》相继出台,居间合同和行纪合同作为专门的有名合同被明文写入合同法,原有的《纪要》即使不作修改,也将因为新的法律、行政法规的颁布实施而失去适用效力。
严格地说,《纪要》只是座谈会形成的人民法院内部审理期货案件的指导文件,不是司法解释,而《规定》已经上升到司法解释的高度来认识,其权威性不言而喻。
3、《规定》的出台体现了对投资者一般保护与特殊保护相结合的思想。民法通则、合同法及商事法律奉行平等、公平的原则,投资者与期货公司、期货公司与交易所在法律上具有同等的法律地位,适当平衡期货公司的责任承担机制并不等于对投资者权益的漠视,实现了期货法律关系向公正、平等理念回归的转变。首先,《规定》第一条开宗明义,“应当依法保护当事人的合法权益”,对市场各方参与者坚持过错和责任相一致的原则区分责任,实行一体保护。
期货市场作为技术性很强的市场,要求参与者具有较高的专业素质和职业技能,投资者与期货公司之间存在严重的信息不对称。期货市场又是一个法律关系复杂的市场,且无专门的《期货法》可循。相对期货公司而言,投资者在交易中处于明显劣势,属于市场中的“弱者”,需要法律对其进行倾斜保护。在无法区分过错大小的情况下,设定对期货公司稍重的责任达到对投资者的特别保护。譬如全权委托、透支交易都是法律禁止的行为,双方都有过错,但期货公司承担责任的比例为损失的60%-80%,投资者的责任比例在20%-40%。可以说,对主要、次要责任的分配比例细化致如此地步,在司法解释中实属罕见,对投资者倾斜保护的目的显而易见。
二、期货司法解释的指导原则
1、意思自治,合法约定优先。《民法通则》第4条规定:“民事活动应当遵循自愿原则”。意思自治是市场经济方式对法律提出的要求,是对“契约自由”的扬弃。每个市场参与者都是自身利益的最佳捍卫者,凭借自己的知识和技能进行活动,对自己行为产生的后果负责。法律让每个人根据自己的判断追求自身利益,旨在促进社会利益的增长。法谚曰:“当事人合法约定即具有创设法律的功能”。在期货市场,意思自治体现为对当事人真实意思的尊重和保护,只要当事人的意思表示是真实和合法的,并且不违背法律、行政法规的强制性规范,当事人的约定就是合法和有效的。实践中,期货公司和客户要特别注意利用经纪合同中约定容易产生争议的问题:譬如强平的条件和通知方式、优价成交收益的处理、客户保证金不足时保留持仓必须采用书面形式、技术故障是否属于不可抗力等等。意思自治为个性化的期货经纪合同的签订奠定法律基础。
《规定》对意思自治,尊重当事人约定的规定可圈可点。《规定》第2条明文规定:人民法院审理案件应当严格按照当事人的约定确定违约责任,但约定违反法律、行政法规强制性规定的除外。譬如第24条关于“吃点”收益的处置,按过去做法应该返还客户,但依据规定,完全可由期货公司和客户约定处理。又譬如透支交易,客户与期货公司、期货公司与交易所可以通过书面协商一致保留持仓。还有关于强行平仓的条款,在客户保证金不足的情况下,并不必然导致强行平仓,是否强平可以取决于双方对风险控制措施和条件的约定。因此,《规定》顺应现代民法区分义务与责任的潮流,在当事人以责任为代价的情况下,规定的义务并不一定非要强制履行。
2、坚持过错归责原则。法律上追究责任有过错责任原则、过错推定原则、无过错原则以及公平原则等四种原则。过错分为故意和过失两种心理状态,但过错归责作为民法史最古老但迄今仍然最重要的原则,在期货市场得到高度重视。“为自己的过错承担责任”从伦理道德上来解释也容易得到人们的认可与赞赏。
判断任何一方是否承担民事责任,必须同时满足四个方面的要求:1.有违约事实或实施了侵权行为;2.当事人有过错(不可抗力或意外事件可免责);3.造成损失;4.行为与损失之间存在客观的、直接的因果关系。(如果因期货经纪合同引发违约纠纷,只需同时满足第1、2项要件即应承担民事责任,由此可见违约责任是一种严格责任。)
《规则》在第3条确定了依过错、过错性质、过错大小追究责任的原则。譬如第12条期货公司分支机构非法经营的,如果客户也有过错,公司不再负全部责任。在对交易结算结果的确认问题上,公司未采取有效措施导致扩大损失的,由公司对扩大的那部分损失承担责任,贯彻了过错原则。第33条透支交易中有关交易所、期货公司对穿仓造成损失的责任承担,第九部分保证合约履行责任、第十部分侵权行为责任等无不是过错原则的体现。
过错推定也是过错责任的延伸,譬如是否入市交易、是否通知追加保证金,期货公司如果无法举证证明已经履行义务,则推定存在过错,承担赔偿责任。
3、贴近市场,尊重惯例。《规定》很大程度上采纳了监管部门和业内的意见和建议,在许多制度上敢于突破陈规,特别是超前考虑了制定期货法、修订《条例》的因素,把期货法视为商法的组成,在司法上民商合一,在内容上规定细致,大胆引入《合同法》的现代法律制度去解释、解决期货商事法律关系,这无疑是司法的巨大进步。还有一点值得注意的是,《规定》借鉴《合同法》第60条:“当事人应当遵循诚实信用原则,根据合同的性质、目的和交易习惯履行通知、协助、保密等义务”,主动吸纳期货市场形成的较为完善的规则和细则,把规则、细则运用到具体的案件审理之中,使惯例具有更大的扩张力。最明显的莫过于第七部分强行平仓和第八部分实物交割责任,简直就是交易所风险管理办法和交割细则的翻版。第21条关于交易指令不全的处理也是适用期货惯例的结果。商事规则、惯例的引入,是国家通过司法手段推动期货行业市场化进程的缩影。
三、期货司法解释的创新与完善
1、赋予期货市场的当事人选择侵权之诉或者违约之诉的权利。通俗的说,有些行为(如对赌、私下对冲等)既是对合同的违反,又是对财产权利的侵害,都可请求法院司法保护,问题在于以何种理由起诉对方能最大限度维护自身利益。因此,有必要比较违约责任与侵权责任各自的优劣,从中选择有利的诉因。
期货侵权与期货合同违约的比较
项 目 期货侵权责任 经纪合同违约责任
主观方面 一般有过错才构成 不以是否有过错为前提
是否造成损失 必须造成损失 不论是否造成实际损失
举证责任 举证行为、损失的存在 只需举证违约事实即可
赔偿范围 直接、间接损失和精神损害赔偿 直接损失加上可预见的损失
管辖法院 由侵权行为地或者被告住所地人民法院管辖 由被告住所地、合同履行地人民法院管辖
适用主要法律 民法通则 民法通则、合同法
以上比较说明:选择侵权之诉获违约之诉各有所长,侵权之诉具有赔偿范围广的优点,而违约之诉具有不问过错、举证简单、无需实际损失也可获赔的优点,关键在于当事人根据实际情况相机选择。
2、承认表见代理。表见代理是指被代理人的行为足以使善意第三人相信无权代理人具有代理权,善意第三人基于信赖关系与无权代理人进行交易,由此造成的后果仍然由被代理人承担的代理。《合同法》第49条规定:“行为人没有代理权、超越代理权或者代理权终止后以被代理人名义订立合同,相对人有理由相信行为人有代理权的,该代理行为有效。”这一条被运用到第9条:非期货公司人员以期货公司名义从事期货交易行为的,视为代理行为有效,期货公司不能以没有授权予以抗辩,仍然应当承担责任。具体在实际中,应当明确以下几点:(1)行为人必须是非期货公司人员(如果是期货公司人员,其行为适用职务行为的法律后果);(2)行为人事实上没有代理权、超越代理权或者代理权已经终止;(3)行为人以期货公司的名义;(4)客户有理由认为行为人有代理权(譬如公司员工手册印有行为人的名字;行为人领取工资、奖金或者公司为其缴纳“三金”;行为人与公司存在人事关系;行为人以员工身份开发客户,公司明知却不表示反对或者默认的;公司撤销对员工的授权却不向客户公示的等等);(5)客户必须善意,无过错,如果客户知道或者应当知道行为人无代理权仍然委托其从事期货交易的,由客户承担责任。(6)本人(这里指期货公司)承担法律责任。期货公司在承担责任后,另行向行为人追偿。总之,表现代理反映了市场经济条件下人们对交易安全法律保障的渴望,体现了鼓励客户交易、促进公司勤勉管理的宗旨。
3、引入居间概念。《合同法》第242条规定:居间合同是居间人向委托人报告订立合同的机会或者提供订立合同的媒介服务,委托人支付报酬的合同。期货居间合同具有以下法律特征:(1)居间人是独立于期货公司、客户之外的法人或公民,就是我们通常说的“掮客”(居间人既不从属于公司,也不从属于客户,法院过于将其作为期货公司的从业人员的做法即将成为历史);(2)居间人服务的内容是为客户、期货公司报告订约机会或者为客户与期货公司实现订约提供媒介服务,;(3)居间人按成果而不是按劳务取得报酬,一般来说,居间人只有在促成客户与期货公司签订期货经纪合同后,才有权按居间合同约定向委托人请求支付报酬。由于事先无法预见能否促成合同成立,故这种报酬具有很大的不确定性;(4)居间人独立承担居间关系产生的法律责任。
相比之下,客户与期货公司之间签订期货经纪合同,适用行纪关系,即是期货公司以自己的名义为客户从事期货交易活动,客户支付公司报酬的合同。期货居间与期货行纪有着明显的区别:
项 目 期货居间合同 期货经纪合同
法律关系 居间人不参与期货交易关系,仅提供订约中介服务 期货公司以自己名义与交易所发生权利义务关系
报酬的取得 可从客户、公司双方取得报酬 仅可从客户处取得报酬
履行的义务 无义务向委托人移交事务 负有移交财产给客户的义务
法律地位、后果 独立承担居间产生的责任 期货交易的后果由客户承担
期货居间人概念的引进,扫除了中国期货市场经纪人改革的法律障碍,为今后期货市场开发成为专门的职业奠定坚实的基础。
4、鼓励交易,尽量让合同生效。市场经济条件下,众多商事活动都借助合同形式来进行,合同成为鼓励交易,创造财富的有力工具,轻易让合同失效将产生交易双方返还财产、恢复原状、赔偿损失的法律责任,其连锁反应必将阻碍资源通过流转达到合理配置的功能的发挥,丧失了社会整体效率,故现代民法尽量鼓励合同生效。
第四部分合同责任部分,已经删去了欺诈、胁迫方式订立合同按无效处理的表述,体现了与《合同法》第54条接轨的现实。对于一方以欺诈、胁迫的手段或者乘人之危,使对方在违背真实意思的情况下订立的期货经纪合同,受损害方有权请求变更或者撤销。受损方请求变更的,人民法院不得撤销。因为欺诈、虚假宣传方式签订的期货经纪合同,在客户交易获利的情况下,宣布合同无效反而使客户利益受损,是否变更合同或者撤销合同,取决于客户对自己利益的判断,这是在坚持意思自治的原则下对客户权利的保护。
另外,还有一些行为,但可因法律特别规定或者客户追认为有效:(1)公司分支机构超越经营范围开展经营活动的;(2)不以真实身份从事期货交易但行为符合交易规则的,(3)不具有主体资格的经营机构导致经纪合同无效的,但机构已按客户交易指令入市的;(4)合同约定不明,无客户指令依据的;执行非受托人的交易指令的;错误执行客户交易指令的。上述行为不再按无效处理,有些在肯定交易结果有效性的同时,规定了具体的责任承担方式,有些则赋予客户追认权,有效保护善意第三方的利益。
5、增加缔约过失责任。合同有效成立后,如一方当事人违反合同,就应承担违约责任。但在合同的缔约阶段,由于合同尚未成立,不能适用违约责任,适用侵权责任也不相宜,一些违反诚实信用原则,并损害对方利益的行为就缺少法律责任的约束。法院在处理此类纠纷时,往往采用诚实信用原则,认定当事人在缔结契约过程中接触与协商之间建立了一种特殊的信任关系,产生了相互协助、通知、保护等义务,此种义务称作“合同前义务”或“附随义务”。如违反这些义务而给对方造成损害,则应负赔偿责任,这种责任就是缔约过失责任。所以,缔约过失责任是指在合同订立过程中,一方因违背其依据诚实信用原则所应负的义务而导致另一方的利益遭受损失并应承担的民事责任。对于期货公司而言,在订立期货经纪合同过程中和履行合同中依法合规,是否就一定没有法律风险呢?答案是否定的。譬如期货公司在订立经纪合同时未履行提示风险的义务,应当依据《合同法》第42条第3项承担赔偿责任。最早要求当事人在订立合同前负有义务的是德国,德国法学家耶林于1861年撰文指出:“法律保护的,并非仅仅是一个业已存在的契约关系,正在发生中的契约关系亦应包括在内,否则一方不免成为对方疏忽的牺牲品。”缔约过失责任先后写入各国民法典。我国《合同法》第42条引入缔约过失,规定:“当事人在订立合同过程中有下列情形之一,给对方造成损失的,应当承担损害赔偿责任:(1)假借订立合同,恶意进行磋商;(2)故意隐瞒与订立合同有关的重要事实或者提供虚假情况;(3)有其他违背诚实信用原则的行为。《合同法》第6条规定:“当事人行使权利、履行义务应当遵循诚实信用原则(诚实信用原则是现代民法的最高指导原则,是道德条款法律化的最佳表述,在法学界享有“帝王条款”之美誉,特别是在法律法规没有明确规定的情况下,成为指导民商事活动的主要依据)。”以上是指缔约过失责任的理论和法律基础。
项 目 期货缔约过失责任 期货经纪合同责任
责任依据 订约前的法定诚信义务 合同的约定义务
主观要件 以过错为要件(故意或过失) 过错与否不影响责任

福建省城市房屋拆迁货币补偿暂行办法

福建省人民政府


福建省人民政府关于印发福建省城市房屋拆迁货币补偿暂行办法的通知

闽政[2002]5号

各市、县(区)人民政府,省政府各部门、各直属机构,各大企业,各高等院校:

  经省政府研究同意,现将《福建省城市房屋拆迁货币补偿暂行办法》印发给你们,请遵照执行,执行中有关问题径向省建设厅反映。

福 建 省 人 民 政 府
二○○二年一月二十八日


福建省城市房屋拆迁货币补偿暂行办法

  第一条 为规范城市房屋拆迁货币补偿工作,保障房屋拆迁当事人的合法权益,根据国务院《城市房屋拆迁管理条例》和国家有关规定,结合我省实际情况,制定本暂行办法。

  第二条 本暂行办法适用于被拆迁房屋的货币补偿。

  第三条 拆迁当事人可以根据自愿、公平、等价有偿的原则,协商被拆迁房屋的货币补偿金额。协商不成的,拆迁人可以委托房地产价格评估机构进行评估,以评估价格作为货币补偿金额的依据。

  第四条 市、县房地产行政主管部门应会同价格主管部门根据房地产市场行情的变化情况及时公布城市规划区范围内各地段等级各类房屋的交易价格行情,为拆迁当事人协商货币补偿金额提供参考。

  第五条 被拆迁房屋的评估应当由具有相应资格条件的房地产价格评估机构(以下简称估价机构)进行,并遵循《房地产估价规范》和国家、省关于房屋拆迁评估的有关规定。

  市、县房屋拆迁管理部门应当建立从事房屋拆迁评估的估价机构及其行为的档案,加强对房屋拆迁评估的监督。

  第六条 被拆迁房屋的评估应当由两名以上注册房地产估价师进行,估价报告应由两名以上注册房地产估价师签字并加盖估价机构公章后生效。

  第七条 被拆迁房屋的评估价格应当以估价时点房屋所在地的房地产市场价格确定。

  被拆迁房屋的估价时点为《房屋拆迁许可证》核发之日。延长拆迁期限的,估价时点为批准延长拆迁期限之日。

  第八条 对同一拆迁范围内同类被拆迁房屋的估价,应当选用同一种估价方法。

  第九条 被拆迁房屋的评估由拆迁人委托,估价费用由委托人支付。

  同一拆迁范围内的拆迁估价业务只能委托一家估价机构承担。

  第十条 被拆迁房屋评估的委托人与估价机构应当签订委托估价书面合同。委托估价合同应明确估价机构指派的估价人员。

  估价人员发生变更的,估价机构应在变更的当日向房屋拆迁管理部门报备。

  估价机构接受委托后,不得向其他估价机构转让受托的估价业务。

  第十一条 拆迁人应当如实向估价机构提供拆迁补偿估价所必须的资料,协助估价机构开展现场查勘等工作。

  被拆迁人应当配合估价机构进行现场查勘。

  第十二条 估价机构应当在估价合同约定的时间内完成估价任务,并以独立的房屋产权为单位分别向委托人提交估价报告。委托估价合同约定估价机构须提交拆迁项目总体估价报告的,从其约定。

  第十三条 拆迁人委托评估的,拆迁人应当在接到估价机构出具的估价报告之日起3日内将评估确定的货币补偿金额在拆迁区域内公布,并在10日内将估价报告送达被拆迁人。

  第十四条 拆迁人对评估确定的货币补偿金额有异议的,可以在接到估价报告之日起15日内向估价机构提出复核的书面申请,估价机构应当在10日内做出复核结论。

  被拆迁人对估价报告确认的货币补偿金额有异议的,被拆迁人可以在接到估价报告之日起15日内向拆迁人提出书面复核申请,拆迁人应当在接到申请之日起5日内将复核申请转交估价机构按前款规定处理。

  第十五条 拆迁人与被拆迁人就货币补偿金额的复核结论达不成补偿安置协议的,可以参考评估结果进一步协商议定货币补偿金额,也可以依照国务院《城市房屋拆迁管理条例》的规定,向房屋拆迁管理部门申请裁决。

  第十六条 经房屋拆迁管理部门裁决,估价报告或复核结论有明显错误的,裁决申请人有权向原估价机构追偿。

  第十七条 被拆迁房屋的二次装饰补偿价格需要进行评估的,应当在委托估价合同中载明或者由委托人另行委托。

  第十八条 产权调换房屋价格的评估依照本办法的规定执行。

  第十九条 本暂行办法自公布之日起施行。在2001年11月1日以后、本暂行办法公布之日以前核发《房屋拆迁许可证》的项目,拆迁人与被拆迁人就被拆除房屋的货币补偿金额未达成协议的,依照本办法规定执行。