“外国法无法查明”法律问题研究

发布时间：2018-04-28 07:57

本文选题：外国法 + 无法查明　；参考：《大连海事大学》2012年硕士论文

【摘要】：中国法院近年来审理的涉外民商事案件逐年增多,而依靠冲突法规则适用外国法的概率却逐年降低。其中最主要的原因是法官以“外国法无法查明”为由而适用了内国法即中国法。从我国有关立法来看,2010年颁布的《中华人民共和国涉外民事关系法律适用法》(下文简称：《适用法》)规定了人民法院、仲裁机构、行政机关和当事人的查明义务,明确了“法国法无法查明”时一律适用中国法。《适用法》的出台是我国法律史上的一次大事件,它是我国几代国际私法立法者与学者经过不懈努力,制定出的第一部国际私法,具有十分重要的意义。但由于《适用法》对于人民法院等查明主体如何进行外国法查明、如何作出“外国法查明”认定、如何确认当事人查明的外国法没有作出细致规定,所以导致目前我国法官自由裁量权过大和中国法滥用的现象还依然存在。一套限制法院自由裁量权的“外国法无法查明”准则是十分重要的。而外国法的性质、外国法查明方法、外国法无法查明认定和外国法无法查明认定后的法律后果是“外国法无法查明”准则里最为重要的理论,下文将从这几方面的法律问题入手对我国的“外国法无法查明”相关理论进行研究。无论何种形式的“外国法无法查明”准则均是取决于该国对于外国法性质的认定。对外国法性质到底是“事实”还是“法律”的不同认定不仅会导致举证责任分配和查明方法的不同,还会直接影响到外国法不能查明时的法律后果。当今世界上对外国法的性质的认定主要有“事实说”、“法律说”、“折中说”(包括“特殊的事实说”和“特殊的法律说”)几种主流体系。坚持不同学说的国家会采用不同的外国法认定规则,认定“外国法无法查明”后也会适用不同的法律后果。在对待外国法性质的问题上,在《适用法》出台前我国把外国法视为“事实”,在《适用法》出台后,我国则把外国法视为“特殊的法律”。笔者认为我国目前把外国法视为“特殊的法律”是符合我国实际的。但笔者认为目前《适用法》仍存在很多不足之处,笔者通过对外国法的性质、外国法查明方法、“外国法无法查明”的认定标准及认定后的法律后果等相关理论、立法和实践的研究和分析,提出了完善我国相关立法的建议,相信在众多学者的共同努力下中国终究会找到适合中国国情的一套“外国法无法查明”准则。
[Abstract]:In recent years, the number of foreign civil and commercial cases tried by Chinese courts has increased year by year, while the probability of applying foreign law by relying on the rules of conflict of laws has decreased year by year. The main reason is that the judge applies the domestic law, that is, the Chinese law, on the grounds that foreign law cannot be ascertained. Judging from the relevant legislation of our country, the Law of the people's Republic of China on the Application of the Law on Foreign Civil Relations (hereinafter referred to as the "applicable Law") promulgated in 2010 stipulates the obligation of the people's court, the arbitration institution, the administrative organ and the parties to ascertain, It is clear that "French law cannot be ascertained" is all applicable to Chinese law. The introduction of "applicable Law" is a major event in the history of Chinese law. It is the first private international law formulated by several generations of private international law legislators and scholars through unremitting efforts. It is of great significance. However, since the applicable Law has no detailed provisions on how the people's court and other ascertainment subjects carry out the foreign law ascertainment, how to make the "foreign law identification" determination, and how to confirm the foreign law identified by the parties, Therefore, the phenomenon of excessive discretion of judges and abuse of Chinese law still exists. It is important that a set of "foreign laws cannot be ascertained" norms that limit the discretion of the court. However, the nature of foreign law, the method of identification of foreign law, the inability of foreign law to ascertain the determination and the legal consequences of the determination are the most important theories in the criterion "foreign law cannot be ascertained", In the following part, we will study the related theories of "the foreign law can not be ascertained" from these aspects of the legal problems. Whatever form of "foreign law cannot be ascertained" criterion is dependent on the determination by the State of the nature of foreign law. Whether the nature of foreign law is "fact" or "law" will not only lead to different distribution of burden of proof and method of identification, but also directly affect the legal consequences when foreign law cannot be ascertained. There are several mainstream systems in the world, such as "fact theory", "law theory", "compromise theory" (including "special fact theory" and "special law theory"). Countries that insist on different doctrines will adopt different rules of recognition of foreign law, and will apply different legal consequences when they decide that "foreign law cannot be ascertained." In dealing with the nature of foreign law, China regards foreign law as "fact" before the promulgation of "applicable Law", and after "applicable Law" is issued, China regards foreign law as "special law". The author thinks that the foreign law is regarded as "special law" in our country at present. However, the author thinks that there are still many deficiencies in the applicable Law at present. Through the theories of the nature of the foreign law, the method of finding out the foreign law, the criterion of "foreign law cannot be ascertained" and the legal consequences after the confirmation, etc. Through the research and analysis of legislation and practice, the author puts forward some suggestions to perfect the relevant legislation in China. It is believed that under the joint efforts of many scholars, China will eventually find a set of "foreign law can't be ascertained" criterion suitable for China's national conditions.
【学位授予单位】：大连海事大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D997;D923

【参考文献】