论形成判决视角下的买卖合同撤销  

On Cancellation of Sales Contract from the Perspective of Formation Judgment

作　　者：闫仁河 高亚春 YAN Ren-he;GAO Ya-chun

机构地区：[1]北京物资学院法学院,北京101149 [2]北京物资学院马克思主义学院,北京101149

出　　处：《求是学刊》2019年第4期115-122,共8页Seeking Truth

基　　金：教育部人文社科研究青年基金项目“中国民事指导性案例理论研究”(12YJC820095);北京物资学院高级别科研项目培育基金“返还原物请求权体系研究”(0541604657);北京市教委科技创新提升计划项目“北京市商品流通管理政策法规后评估制度建设与应用”(TJSHS201510037003)

摘　　要：《物权法》第28条与买卖合同撤销规范之间的法律适用关系是个需要思考的问题。撤销买卖合同能够重新引发所有权变动,《物权法》第28条规定的形成判决应当包括判决撤销买卖合同,该法第28条为买卖合同撤销规范的填补性法条。《合同法》第54条等只是规定了合同撤销的构成要件或部分法律效果,并未完整规定买卖合同被撤销的法律效果,更未提及所有权归属。如卖方请求判决撤销买卖合同并判决所有权归属于卖方,则法院仅仅援引该法第54条支持卖方的诉讼请求,并不能构成一个"规整",当属说理不充分,应当同时援引《合同法》第54条等合同撤销规范与《物权法》第28条。The application relationship between Article 28 of Property Law and the revocation of Sales Contract is a problem that needs to be considered. Revocation of Sales Contract can trigger the change of ownership. The formation judgment stipulated in article 28 of Property Law should include cancellation of Sales Contract. Article 54 of the contract law only stipulates the constitutive elements or partial legal effect of contract cancellation, but does not fully specify the legal effect of Sales Contract cancellation, let alone the ownership.If the seller requests a judgment to cancel the Sales Contract and the judgment of ownership belongs to the seller, then the court can only invoke the Article 54 to support the seller’s lawsuit request, which cannot constitute a"regulation"and is considered as insufficient reasoning. It should simultaneously invoke the contract cancellation norms such as Article 54 of the contract law and Article 28 of Property Law.

关 键 词：形成判决 买卖合同 撤销 不完全法条 

分 类 号：D923.2[政治法律—民商法学] D923.6[政治法律—法学]