論繼承回復請求權理論與實務之研究

CCUR > College of Law > Department of Law & Graduate Institute of Law > thesis > Item 987654321/52714

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://irlib.pccu.edu.tw/handle/987654321/52714

Title:	論繼承回復請求權理論與實務之研究 A Study on Restitution of the Right to Inheritance in Theory and Practice
Authors:	王淯萱
Contributors:	法律學系
Keywords:	繼承權被侵害繼承回復請求權繼受法定代理人消滅時效
Date:	2022
Issue Date:	2023-07-06 14:34:49 (UTC+8)
Abstract:	我國有關於繼承回復請求權之制度規定於民法第1146條，其規定之內容為：「繼承權被侵害者，被害人或其法定代理人得請求回復之（第一項）。前項回復請求權，自知悉被侵害之時起，2年間不行使而消滅；自繼承開始時起逾10年者亦同（第二項）。」該條文規定之內容雖然係繼受於日本民法第884條：「繼承回復請求權自繼承人或其法定代理人知悉繼承權受侵害之事實時起，5年間不行使而消滅，自繼承開始時，經過20年者亦同。」而來，日本法與本國法之差異，僅有消滅時效期間之不同，有關於我國繼承回復請求權於立法上之意義、存在理由與性質及運用在實務上之效力、時效及行使的效力等，於我國學說及實務上諸多討論，故本文擬以解釋論與立法論作為深入探究。　　民法第1146條曾於民國（下同）經86年10月17日司法院釋字第437號解釋、105年行政院提出之修正草案、以及107年12月14日司法院釋字第771號解釋，惟從19年立法以來，發生諸多爭議問題。故本文參酌日本、德國以及瑞士有關繼承回復請求權之立法例，以期本文在文獻上之價值，能作為我國未來在立法及實務上運作之參考。 In Taiwan, the restitution of the right of inheritance in Article 1146 of the Civil Code stipulates: “Where the right to inherit has been infringed upon, the injured party or his statutory agent may claim its restitution”. (Paragraph 1) The right to claim as provided in the preceding Paragraph is extinguished if not exercised within two years from the date of knowing such infringement. The same rule applies where ten years have elapsed from the opening of the succession. (Paragraph 2) ” Although the contents of Article 1146 are inherited from Article 884 of the Japanese Civil Code : “The restitution of the right of inheritance shall be extinguished for not being exercised within five years after the acknowledgement of injury to the right to inherit by the heir or his statutory agent. The same rule applies where twenty years have elapsed from the time of the opening of the succession.” As the prescriptive period is the only difference in the law between Taiwan and Japan, and there are many debates in theory and practice regarding the restitution of the right of inheritance in Taiwan in terms of legislative meaning, rationale and nature of existence, the effect in practice, prescriptive period, and power of exercise, this paper attempts to conduct an in-depth study in terms of interpretation and legislation. Although Article 1146 of the Civil Code has undergone the interpretation by the Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 437 dated October 17, 1997, the draft amendment proposed by the Executive Yuan in 2016 , and the interpretation of the Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 771 dated December 14, 2018 , it has attracted much dispute since its legislation in 1930. By referring to the examples of legislation for the restitution of the right of inheritance in Japan, Germany, and Switzerland, we hope to provide a reference for future law reforms and in practice .
Appears in Collections:	[Department of Law & Graduate Institute of Law ] thesis

Files in This Item:

File	Description	Size	Format
index.html		0Kb	HTML	85	View/Open

View Licence

Loading...