民法典体系下婚约性质之辨  

Research on the Nature of Engagement under the System of the Civil Code

作　　者：金眉[1] Jin Mei

机构地区：[1]中国政法大学民商经济法学院

出　　处：《政法论坛》2022年第6期113-124,共12页Tribune of Political Science and Law

基　　金：国家社会科学基金项目“亲等和亲系制度研究”(17BFX138)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：在立法的层面,婚约不是法律调整的对象,但在司法的层面,婚约纠纷被区分为身份与财产纠纷,由司法裁判按照不同的法律效力予以调整,由此也引发了学术界关于婚约性质认定的分歧。有关事实行为、情谊行为、准法律行为的性质认定在学理上都不是对婚约本质恰当的反映,也不能恰当地解释婚约当事人之间存在的合意和婚约在当下中国法律现状下存在的不完整权利义务状态。婚约性质宜认定为是一种契约,是作为本约的结婚契约的预约,也是一项独立的契约,法律行为说更能反映我国当下婚约效力真实的现实。《民法典》第464条第2款和第495条第2款也为婚约解除的效力提供了法律适用的路径,有关婚约解除的效力规则问题迎刃而解。鉴于婚约在现代社会的效力规则已经发生了改变,在参照适用相关条款时,有关合同违约责任的规则并不能完全适用于婚约。At the legislative level,engagement are not the object of legal adjustment,but at the judicial level,engagement disputes are divided into identity and property disputes,and judicial decisions are based on dif ferent The legal ef fect was adjusted,which also led to dif ferences in the determination of the nature of the engagement in the academic circles.The determination of the nature of factual acts,friendship acts,and quasilegal acts is not a proper refl ection of the nature of engagement,nor can it properly explain the agreement between the parties to the engagement and the incomplete rights of the engagement under the current Chinese legal status.The nature of the engagement should be regarded as a kind of contract,the appointment of the engagement as this contract,and it is also an independent contract.Article 464,paragraph 2 and Article 495,paragraph 2 of the Civil Code provide a path of legal application for the validity of the dissolution of the engagement,and the rules on the validity of the dissolution of the engagement are easily resolved.In view of the fact that the validity rules of engagement have changed in modern society,the rules of liability for breach of contract cannot be fully applied to engagement when referring to relevant provisions.

关 键 词：民法典 体系 婚约 性质 

分 类 号：D923.9[政治法律—民商法学]