我国个人破产立法的制度框架构想  

The Institutional Framework of Personal Bankruptcy Legislation in China

作　　者：汤维建[1,2,3] TANG Weijian

机构地区：[1]中国人民大学法学院 [2]中国人民大学民商事法律科学研究中心 [3]中国法学会民事诉讼法学研究会

出　　处：《上海政法学院学报（法治论丛）》2023年第1期69-80,共12页Journal of Shanghai University of Political Science & Law(The Rule of Law Forum)

基　　金：2019年度司法部国家法治与法学理论研究项目“个人破产制度构建的难点与对策研究”的阶段性研究成果,项目编号:19SFB2030。

摘　　要：我国个人破产立法已被提上立法的议事日程,然而个人破产的制度框架究竟如何厘定尚待深入探讨。我国个人破产立法应当在现行的企业破产法之外单独进行,而不宜采取混同立法模式。消费者个人破产应当被统一纳入个人破产法加以调整,同时体现出某些特殊规则。司法程序以外的替代性破产程序与司法型破产程序应当通过统一立法加以一体化调整。在价值取向上,我国个人破产立法既不宜采取绝对的债权人保护本位的立法原则也应避免绝对的债务人保护本位的立法倾向,而应走一条相融相合、持平折中的平衡发展道路。同时,应当根据数额性、诚信性、营业性和争议性等因素将个人破产程序分为普通程序和简易程序两大类型加以调整。China’s personal bankruptcy legislation has been listed on the agenda, but how to determine the institutional framework of personal bankruptcy is yet to be discussed. This paper holds that the individual bankruptcy legislation in China should be carried out separately from the current enterprise bankruptcy law,rather than adopting the mode of mixed legislation. Consumer personal bankruptcy should be incorporated into the unified personal bankruptcy law to be adjusted, while reflecting some special rules. The judicial bankruptcy procedure and the alternative bankruptcy procedure should be adjusted by unified legislation.In terms of value orientation, China’s personal bankruptcy legislation should neither adopt the legislative principle of absolute creditor protection standard, nor choose the legislative tendency of absolute debtor protection standard, instead, should take a balanced development path of integration and compromise. At the same time, personal bankruptcy procedure should be divided into two types: ordinary procedure and summary procedure, according to the factors of amount, good faith, business and dispute complex.

关 键 词：个人破产立法 消费者破产 司法型破产 自愿型破产 普通破产程序 

分 类 号：D411.92[政治法律—政治学]