民法典视野下以物抵债协议的法律效果论  

On the Legal Effects of the Paying-a-Debt-in-Kind-Assets Agreement in Light of Civil Code

作　　者：罗正环 Luo Zhenghuan

机构地区：[1]安徽省蚌埠市蚌山区人民法院

出　　处：《北京政法职业学院学报》2022年第4期37-42,共6页Journal of Beijing College of Politics and Law

摘　　要：以物抵债协议的本质特征为以他种给付替代原定给付。履行期限届满前签订的以物抵债协议应当类推适用流押条款、流质条款的效力规定。“代物清偿”消灭债的根本原因在于实际履行,以物抵债协议既不具有消灭原债的效力,又不具有独立性,由是产生“新债”与“旧债”关联并存状态。将“新债清偿”规则适用于以物抵债协议,在我国存在法源缺乏及偏离原意的适用困境,应依习惯与整体解释填补合同漏洞,构建以物抵债协议的履行规则。The essential feature of the paying-a-debt-in-kind-assets agreement is to replace the original payment with other kind of payment.In the case of a debt-for-substance agreement signed before the expiration of the term of performance,the validity provisions of the current pledge clause and the liquid clause shall be applied by analogy.The fundamental reason for"Datio in solutionto"to eliminate debts lies in the actual performance.The paying-a-debt-in-kind-assets agreement does not have the effect of eliminating the original debt,nor does it have independence,so that"new debt"and"old debt"co-exist.Applying the rule of“new debt settlement”to the paying-a-debt-in-kind-assets agreement in our country lacks source of law and deviates from the original meaning of the rule.We should fill the contract loophole and construct the implementation rule of the paying-a-debt-in-kind-assets agreement according to the custom and overall interpretation.

关 键 词：以物抵债协议 成立要件 效力样态 履行规则 

分 类 号：D923[政治法律—民商法学]