通谋虚伪表示不得对抗规则的理论解构--以《中华人民共和国民法典》第146条第1款为中心  

Conspiracy Hypocrisy Indicates the Theoretical Deconstruction of Rules:Focusing on Article 146,Paragraph 1,of the General Principles of the Civil Law

作　　者：杜新梅 Du Xinmei

机构地区：[1]中南财经政法大学法学院,湖北武汉430073

出　　处：《南海法学》2020年第2期54-67,共14页The South China Sea Law Journal

摘　　要：作为意思表示瑕疵之一,意思自治与信赖保护基本原理,成为否定通谋虚伪表示效力的法理基础。法律解释的任务,在于回应现存的竞合问题,减少可能的法律冲突。通过正向定义与反向排除相结合的方式,善意第三人的内涵及适用范围得以明晰。不得对抗规则关系概念的基础理解,亦是通谋虚伪表示制度的核心设计。“享受权说”为不得对抗规则恰如其分的法律表达,该制度设计与善意取得制度不存在冲突,司法裁判提供了可行的解释方案。在解释各国不同无效模式的选择及对善意第三人保护的问题时,不可泛泛而谈、无视各自的规范性语境。各国对“绝对无效”的理解一致,但对“相对无效”的理解,不可一概而论。建立在无效概念理解基础上的无效模式的选择、善意第三人的保护、不得对抗规则的存废等问题,均需置于各国不同法律环境中予以考量3我国宜采相对无效模式,既可避免刚性规定适用条件严苛的弊端,又可与现代私法自治理念相适应。《中华人民共和国民法典》第146条第1款未将不得对抗规则作为一般性保护规则,与形式主义物权变动模式相契合,并与我国法律体系保持了内在一致性。为实现通谋虚伪表示制度在体系逻辑上的协调,既需要立足实际对法律规定进行适应性解释,又需要从比较法角度取长补短,实现法律的适度创新。As one of the flaws in meaning expression,the basic principles of will autonomy and trust protection have become the legal basis for negating the effectiveness of collusion.The task of legal interpretation is to respond to existing issues of competition and cooperation and reduce possible legal conflicts.Through the combination of forward definition and reverse exclusion,the meaning and scope of a bona fide third party are made clear.The basic understanding of the concept of rule relationship must not be opposed,and it is also the core design of the conspiracy false representation system.The4<right to enjoy*is an appropriate legal expression that cannot be opposed to the rules.There is no conflict between the design of the system and the system of obtaining in good faith,and judicial judgments provide a feasible explanation.In explaining the choice of different invalid models and the protection of bona fide third parties in various countries,we cannot generalize and ignore their respective normative contexts.The understanding of“absolute invalidity”is consistent among countries,but the understanding of“relatively invalidity”cannot be generalized.The choice of an invalid model based on the understanding of the concept of invalidity,the protection of a third party in good faith,and the prohibition against the existence or abolition of rules must be considered in different legal environments in various countries.China should adopt a relatively ineffective model,which can avoid the disadvantages of the strict requirements of rigid regulations and is compatible with the concept of modern private law autonomy.Article 146,paragraph 1,of the Corpus of Civil Law does not take the non-confrontation rule as a general protection rule,conforms to the formalist mode of change of real rights,and maintains internal consistency with China’s legal system.In order to realize the coordination of the system of conspiracy and false representation in the system logic,it is necessary to adapt the legal provisions based on the

关 键 词：通谋虚伪表示 无效模式 不得对抗规则 替代方案 

分 类 号：D923[政治法律—民商法学]