区分原则:区分什么?  

The Principle of Distinction:What is the Distinction?

作　　者：王轶[1,2] 

机构地区：[1]中国人民大学民商事法律科学研究中心 [2]中国人民大学法学院

出　　处：《东方法学》2022年第4期181-188,共8页Oriental Law

摘　　要：我国民法典就基于合同行为的物权变动认可区分原则,以债权形式主义的物权变动模式为基础,明确区分合同行为效力发生的条件与物权变动法律效果发生的条件,其第215条属于区分原则的典型法律体现。债权形式主义与物权形式主义的物权变动模式,代表着两种不同的实现区分原则的法律技术。以两种物权变动模式为前提,都能得出第215条所表达的结论,这也是在解释论上围绕区分原则区分什么的问题出现争议的一个主要原因。就民法典第597条第1款以及第641条第1款而言,在物权形式主义的物权变动模式和债权形式主义的物权变动模式之下,都可以得到合理解释,并完成法律的构成。区别之处在于:在不同的物权变动模式之下,相同的法律条文会得出不同的法律解释结论,会呈现不同的法律构成,这就是物权变动模式立法选择的体系效应。需要指出的是,从文义解释、体系解释及历史解释等角度观察,民法典第352条但书的规定并未被赋予贯彻区分原则,以解决房屋交易中已交付但未登记的房屋所有权归属的使命。因此,不宜解释为属于民法典第209条第1款但书的法律体现,第352条也并非区分原则的法律体现。The Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China recognizes the principle of distinction in the change of real right which is based on contractual acts.On the basis of real right change with regard to the formalism of creditors’rights,it clearly distinguishes between the conditions for the effectiveness of contractual acts and the legal effect of real right change.Article215 of the Civil Code is a typical legal expression of the principle of distinction.The mode of real right alteration of creditor’s right formalism and real right formalism represents two different legal technologies to realize the principle of distinction.So the conclusion of Article 215 can be drawn on the premise of two modes of real right change.Also,this is one of the main reasons why there is a dispute about what distinction is,based on the principle of distinction in interpretation theory.In terms of paragraphs 1 of Article 597 and of Article 641 of the Civil Code,a reasonable explanation can be attained and a full composition of law can be realized under the mode of real right change with respect to real right formalism and the creditor’s right formalism.The distinction is that the same legal provisions will draw different conclusions of legal interpretation and present different legal compositions under different modes of real right change,which is the systematic influence of legislative choice of the mode of real right change.It should be noted that the proviso to Article 352 of the Civil Code is not assigned to implement the principle of distinction to realize the ownership of the delivered but unregistered houses in the housing transaction from the perspective of the literal,systematic and historical interpretation.Therefore,it should not be interpreted as the legal expression of the proviso to Paragraph 1 of Article 209 of the Civil Code.And Article 352 is not the legal expression of the principle of distinction.

关 键 词：合同行为 物权变动 区分原则 债权形式主义 物权形式主义 法律解释 

分 类 号：D923.2[政治法律—民商法学]