民法总则第10条私法渊源之“法律”教义论  

The Doctrine of “Law” of the Origin of Private Law in Article 10 of the General Principles of Civil Law

作　　者：苏志猛 SU Zhimeng(Southwest University of Political Science and Law,Chongqing 401120,China)

机构地区：[1]西南政法大学,重庆401120

出　　处：《河南科技学院学报（社会科学版）》2019年第1期39-46,共8页Journal of Henan Institute of Science and Technology

基　　金：2018年度西南政法大学科研创新项目"裁判人工智能化下的私法适用指导"(2018XZXS-077)

摘　　要：民法总则对民事法律渊源首次通过立法明确了法律与习惯的二元架构。形式"法律"主义与实质"法律"主义论者对于该法第10条"法律"的范围界定各执一家之言,前者基于体系解释角度、立法价值角度以及法安全性角度,主张该法的"法律"应为狭义说;后者基于法社会学角度、最高人民法院解释角度、比较法角度,认为此"法律"适宜定位于广义说。但需要指出的是形式"法律"主义与实质"法律"主义观点之下均存在一定的不合理性,形式"法律"主义的短视使其适用范围过于狭窄,而实质"法律"主义的具化内容亦存在诸多症结。故而,可以在对二者所存问题进行价值衡量之后提出对该法"法律"外延的缓和界定。For the first time,the General Principles of Civil Law have enacted legislation to clarify the dual structure of law and custom.Formal“legal”doctrine and substantive“legal”doctrine holders hold different opinions on the definition of the scope of Article 10.Of which the former holds that the law should be narrow in terms of system interpretation,legislative value and legal security,while the latter holds that it is suitable for broad in terms of Sociology of law,interpretation of the Supreme Court and comparative law.It should be pointed out that there are certain irrationalities under the views of formal“legal”doctrine and substantive“legal”doctrine.The short-sightedness of the formal“legal”doctrine makes its scope of application too narrow,while the materialized content of the substantive“legal”doctrine also has many cruxes.Therefore,the extension of the law can be postponed and defined after measuring the value of the two problems.

关 键 词：民法总则 民法渊源 实质法律主义 形式法律主义 缓和界定 

分 类 号：D923[政治法律—民商法学]