合同法总则替代债法总则立法思路之质疑  

Questioning the Legislative Proposals on Substituting the General Provisions of Obligation Law with the General Provisions of Contract Law

作　　者：聂圣[1] Nie Sheng(Law School,Central China Normal University,Wuhan Hubei 430079,China)

机构地区：[1]华中师范大学法学院,湖北武汉430079

出　　处：《河北科技师范学院学报（社会科学版）》2019年第1期1-5,共5页Journal of Hebei Normal University of Science & Technology(Social Sciences)

基　　金：中央高校基本科研业务费资助华中师范大学创新项目"保障性住房社区治理的政策法律分析"(2018CXZZ077)

摘　　要：合同法总则替代债法总则的立法思路虽然主导了当前的民法典分则编纂工作,但是其科学性值得怀疑。从体系维度来看,我国编纂一部"联邦式体系"的民法典,债法总则是其必要构成部分。从功能维度来看,尽管合同法总则与债法总则的功能有重叠,但合同法总则并不能替代债法总则。从方法维度来看,合同法总则替代债法总则的方法论基础是运用准用的立法技术使其他类型的债适用合同法总则的规定。这种技术滥用会造成债法规则的不完备性,影响民法典的安定性。合同法总则替代债法总则的立法思路存在疏漏,民法典仍有必要设置债法总则。Although the legislative proposals on substituting the general provisions of obligation law with the general provisions of contract law is dominant, its scientific nature is questionable. From the perspective of the system, China compiles a Civil Code of “federal system”, the general provisions of obligation law is an essential part of it. From the functional dimension, the functions of the general provisions of contract law and the general provisions of obligation law overlap, but the general provisions of obligation law cannot be replaced. From the perspective of method, the methodological basis of substituting the general provisions of obligation law with the general provisions of contract law is used legislative technique to make other types of obligations applicable general provisions of the contract law. The abuse of this method will result in the incompleteness of the rules of the obligation law and affect stability of the civil code. There is an omission in the legislative proposals on substituting the general provisions of obligation law with the general provisions of contract law. It is still necessary to set up the general provisions of the obligation law in the Civil Code.

关 键 词：债法总则 合同法总则 民法典 

分 类 号：D923[政治法律—民商法学]