诉讼时效制度正当理由的重述——兼论“保护权利人”之理念  

Restatement of Justifiable Reasons for the System of Limitation of Action: Also on the Idea of “Protecting the Obligee”

作　　者：陈明芳[1] Chen Mingfang

机构地区：[1]中南财经政法大学法学院

出　　处：《法制与社会发展》2022年第5期113-131,共19页Law and Social Development

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重大项目“新兴学科视野中的法律逻辑及其拓展研究”(18ZDA034)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：诉讼时效制度的正当理由是构建具体规则的依据。当前立法机关主张的立法理由“促使权利人及时行使权利”“维护交易秩序和安全”存在正当性解释困境和对制度建构与实践的指引困境。从现有立法理由中抽象出的“权利人之可归责性”和“义务人之可保护性”是支持诉讼时效制度的一阶理由,但是,二者均因情境化而存在效率和正确性上的缺陷。当由时间经过产生的不确定性超出法秩序容忍的范围时,“维护法的确定性”获得了超越其他理由的强度,是支持诉讼时效制度通过一阶理由对权利作出筛选性限制的积极二阶理由。基于对理由的重述,应在立法和司法上应用“保护权利人”理念,以在规则层面达到利益的宏观平衡,并在适用层面再次校准利益的分配。Justifiable reasons for the system of limitation of action are the basis for the construction of specific rules. At present, the legislative reasons advocated by the legislature, such as “promoting the obligee to exercise his rights in time” and “maintaining transaction order and security”, have the dilemmas of legitimate interpretation and guiding the construction and practice of the system. “The attributability of obligee” and “the protectability of obligors” abstracted from the existing legislative reasons are the first-order reasons for the system of limitation of action, but both of them have defects in efficiency and correctness due to contextualization. When the uncertainty generated by the time exceeds the tolerance range of the legal order, “maintaining the certainty of law” will obtain a strength beyond other reasons’ strength, which is a positive second-order reason to support the system of limitation of action to make a restriction on rights through first-order reasons. Based on the restatement of reasons, the idea of “protecting the obligee” should be applied in legislation and justice to achieve a macro balance of benefits at the level of rules and recalibrate the distribution of benefits at the level of application.

关 键 词：诉讼时效 立法理由 理由位阶 法的确定性 保护权利人 

分 类 号：D923[政治法律—民商法学]