以物抵债裁判规则的发展趋势与建构方向——2011-2019年最高人民法院审判经验的考察与分析  

Developing Trends and Construction Directions of the Rule for “Paying Debts in Kind Assets”:Investigation and Analysis of the Judicial Experience of the Supreme People’s Court from 2011 to 2019

作　　者：肖俊[1] Xiao Jun

机构地区：[1]上海交通大学凯原法学院

出　　处：《南大法学》2020年第1期101-115,共15页NanJing University Law Journal

摘　　要：“以物抵债”一词源于我国经济社会生活中的日常语言,人们不加区分地以之描述债的变更、担保、替代清偿等各种法律现象,在学界也引发诸多争议。从2011年至2019年最高人民法院审判经验的发展趋势可以看出,司法实践逐渐将之定位为一种债的消灭方式,由此形成系统的替代清偿规则。2019年最高人民法院发布的《全国法院民商事审判工作会议纪要》第44条和第45条是对既有审判经验的总结,但其中也存在着一些不合理的类型区分,需要通过合同法的基本原理,以替代清偿为导向,围绕着新旧债务的并存关系进行解释与完善。The term "paying debts in kind assets"is derived from the ordinary language in our economic and social life.People use it in a general way to describe various legal phenomena,such as the modification of obligations,guarantees,and the alternative liquidation of debts,which has also caused a lot of controversy in academics.Based on the development of the trial experience of the Supreme People’s Court from 2011 to 2019,it can be observed that judicial practices gradually construct it as a system of the elimination of debt,namely the alternative liquidation of debts.Articles 44 and 45 of No.254(2019)of the Supreme People’s Court are a summary of the judicial experience,but there are also some unreasonable classifications of"paying debts in kind assets".It is necessary to adopt the doctrines of contract law to interpret and improve the rules of alternative liquidation of debts.

关 键 词：以物抵债 替代清偿 履行期届满前的以物抵债 买卖型担保 

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