劳动者留置权的正当性阐释——对一则最高人民法院公报案例的批评  

Demonstration of Legitimacy of Employee Lien-with Criticism of a Judgment in SPC Gazette

作　　者：王硕[1] Wang Shuo(Law School,Tianjin University of Commerce,Tianjin 300134)

机构地区：[1]天津商业大学法学院,天津300134

出　　处：《河南财经政法大学学报》2020年第5期50-58,共9页Journal of Henan University of Economics and Law

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重点项目“合同法立法相关问题研究”的(项目编号:17AFX020)阶段性成果。

摘　　要：最高人民法院公报案例"长三角商品交易所有限公司诉卢海云返还财产纠纷案"实际上确立了否认劳动者留置权的裁判规则。该案的二审判决否认劳动者与用人单位具有平等、独立的法律地位,将劳动者视为用人单位的附庸,不分场合地将劳动合同关系视为纯粹的用人单位内部关系。这一判决不仅有悖于劳动法的基本原理,而且有悖于先前的司法实践。为实现个案公正、保障用人单位正常开展生产经营活动,应当对劳动者留置权的行使施加合理的限制,而不宜全盘否定。作为高法公报案例,该案判决的误导性不容小视。应当尽快对其加以修正,肯定劳动者留置权的正当性。留置权作为一种私力救济的手段,可以有效弥补公力救济之不足,在维护劳动者权益及维护社会和谐稳定方面有着独到的现实意义。The judgment of YRD Commodity Exchange Co.,Ltd.v.Lu Haiyun(SPC Gazette,Issue 1,2017.No.243)has established the rule that the lien of employee is not recognized in employment disputes.The judgment of second instance denied the equal and independent legal relationship between employee and employer.The judgment regarded the employee as the vassal of employer and considered the employment contract as pure interior relationship of employer regardless of settings.This judgment violates both the basic principles of labor law and anterior judicial practice.In order to achieve fairness of individual cases and ensure the normal production and operation activities of the employing unit,it is necessary to impose reasonable restrictions on the exercise of lien of employee,and it is not appropriate to totally deny it.As a case in SPC Gazette,its judgment is extremely misleading.This judgment shall be rectified as soon as possible and the lien of employee shall be fully affirmed.As a means of private relief,the lien of employee can effectively make up for the deficiencies of public relief and has a unique practical significance in maintenance of both the legal rights and interests of the employees and social harmony and stability.

关 键 词：劳动者留置权 劳动合同 私力救济 

分 类 号：D922.2[政治法律—经济法学]