鼓励交易原则的反思与合理表达

发布时间：2018-02-08 10:34

本文关键词： 合同法鼓励交易原则效率缔约自由　出处：《政治与法律》2017年07期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：鼓励交易原则对于我国《合同法》的制定和近年的司法实践具有极为重要的意义。其实我国学界并未就其相关基础理论形成共识。鼓励交易原则应以社会整体意义上的经济效率为导向,鼓励合法、自愿、可能、效率最大化的交易。鼓励交易原则在作用方式上可以分为积极方式和消极方式,在适用上应满足必要性和充分合理性,尤其需要合理平衡其与消极缔约自由之保护的关系。由此重新检视我国《合同法》中的相关制度可以发现,近年来以司法解释形式创设的必要条款、预约合同、无权处分、一物(地)多卖(租)的实际履行顺序等合同法新制度中,鼓励交易原则的运用分别存在过度、缺位及异化三大问题。在编纂我国《民法典》合同编的过程中,应以鼓励交易原则的合理表达为线索,从立法论和解释论两个角度对这四项制度进行重构和解释,从而为完善相关制度提供新的思路。
[Abstract]:The principle of encouraging transaction is of great significance to the formulation of contract law and the judicial practice in recent years. In fact, there is no consensus on its basic theory in Chinese academic circles. The principle of encouraging transaction should be based on the whole idea of society. In the sense of economic efficiency, Encouraging transactions that are legal, voluntary, possible, and efficient. The principle of encouraging transactions can be divided into positive and negative ways of working, and should be applied in such a way as to satisfy the necessity and full reasonableness, In particular, it is necessary to strike a reasonable balance between the protection of the freedom to conclude a contract and the protection of the negative freedom of contracting. From this review, we can find that the necessary provisions created in the form of judicial interpretation in recent years, such as the appointment of contracts and the unauthorized disposition, can be re-examined in China's contract Law. In the new system of contract law, such as the order of actual performance of one thing (land), the order of actual performance, and so on, there are three problems in the application of the principle of encouraging transaction: excessive, vacancy and alienation. The reasonable expression of encouraging transaction principle should be taken as the clue to reconstruct and explain the four systems from the angle of legislative theory and explanation theory so as to provide a new way of thinking for perfecting the relevant system.
【作者单位】：武汉大学法学院;
【基金】：作者主持的中国法学会2016年部级一般课题“司法解释创设的合同法新制度实证研究”(项目编号:CLS[2016]C55)的成果之一
【分类号】：D923.6

【相似文献】