破产法视野下商业银行扣款抵债的效力认定与法律构成  

On the Effectiveness Determination and Legal Constitution of Bank Deductions from the Perspective of Bankruptcy Law

作　　者：乔博娟 Qiao Bo-juan

机构地区：[1]北京航空航天大学法学院 [2]中国人民大学破产法研究中心

出　　处：《苏州大学学报（法学版）》2021年第3期130-141,共12页Journal of Soochow University：Law Edition

基　　金：中国法学会部级法学研究课题“破产重整中担保债权风险防范法律问题研究”[项目编号:CLS(2020)ZZ027]的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：基于类案分析可知,当前司法实践对于破产程序中银行扣款抵债行为的性质和效力认定存在较大分歧,并衍生为可以抵销的肯定说与应予撤销的否定说之争,存在“同案不同判”的法律适用困境。银行扣款抵债行为的效力冲突实质是正当利益之间的冲突,反映出破产抵销权与破产撤销权不同的立法价值取向。通过识别破产抵销权与破产撤销权所保护的不同法益及其功能定位,衡平适用二者时应当结合个案情况加以分析和判断,进而统一裁判标准。在银行行使抵销权具有正当性的前提下,法院应着眼于破产抵销权构成要件的审查,确保银行行权符合法定的实体条件和程序条件,避免滥用抵销权获得优于其他债权人的超额利益。Based on the analysis of similar cases,it can be seen that the current judicial practice has large differences in the determination of the nature and effectiveness of bank deductions in bankruptcy procedures.This has led to a dispute between the affirmative theory that can be offset and the negative theory that should be avoided,resulting in the formation of the dilemma of the application of the law in different judgments in the same case.The conflict of the effectiveness of bank deductions for debt repayment is essentially a conflict between legitimate interests,which reflects the different legislative value orientations of bankruptcy set-off rights and avoidance rights.By identifying the different legal interests and functional positioning protected from the right of set-off and avoidance,when applying the two equally,the analysis and judgment should be combined with the individual case to unify the judgment standard.On the premise that the bank’s exercise of the right of set-off is justified,it should focus on the review of the constituent elements of the bankruptcy set-off right to ensure that the bank’s exercise of the right meets the statutory substantive and procedural conditions,and avoid abuse of the set-off right to obtain an excess that is superior to other creditors interest.

关 键 词：商业银行 扣款抵债 破产抵销权 破产撤销权 

分 类 号：D922.291.92[政治法律—经济法学]