《民法典》人格权侵害禁令溯源、性质及其制度构建  

The origin,nature and system construction of the injunction of personality right in the Civil Code

作　　者：毋爱斌 范响 WU Aibin;FAN Xiang(Research Center for People’s Court,Southwest University of Political Science and Law,Chongqing 401120,P.R.China;School of Law,Tsinghua University,Beijing 100084,P.R.China)

机构地区：[1]西南政法大学人民法庭研究中心,重庆401120 [2]清华大学法学院,北京100084

出　　处：《重庆大学学报（社会科学版）》2023年第5期240-252,共13页Journal of Chongqing University(Social Science Edition)

基　　金：西南政法大学2021年度校级科研项目“对第三人到期债权执行程序的立法研究”。

摘　　要：为满足及时制止人格权侵权行为的规则供给需求,《民法典》第997条增设了人格权侵害禁令制度。但尚待修改的《民事诉讼法》没有为之提供配套的程序,《民法典》也未进行相应的规定,有必要分析如何构建人格权侵害禁令制度。构建制度的前提是明晰其性质,而学界目前就人格权侵害禁令的性质尚未形成共识,多数观点认为是临时禁令,少数观点认为是永久禁令。鉴于这一制度借鉴自国外制度,借鉴对象的性质及相应规则对于分析我国人格权侵害禁令的性质及制度构建具有重要意义,因而本文从制度溯源开始,结合借鉴对象的性质、功能以及我国的本土语境,分析我国人格权侵害禁令的性质,并提出人格权侵害禁令制度的完善建议。我国人格权侵害禁令制度源自英美法上的禁令制度,而非直接来源于罗马法上的禁止令状或令状制度。英美法上的禁令制度既包括永久性救济,也包括临时性救济,还包括其他法官发出的命令;既有财产保全的内容,也有行为保全的内容,还有行为给付判决的内容。多数观点主张将人格权侵害禁令作为临时禁令的理由并不充分,且不独立于诉讼的禁令制度与我国既有制度相重复。较为妥当的方案是使人格权侵害禁令独立于诉讼,使其具有相对独立的制度功能;基于效率与公正的平衡,使法院既可以迅速发出临时性的人格权侵害禁令,也可以及时发出永久性的人格权侵害禁令,并且在同一程序中,可以先发出临时性禁令要求当事人在程序结束前停止行为,在程序结束时以永久性禁令取代之。基于人格权侵害禁令的内部差异,人格权侵害禁令的审查程序内部也应当具有相应区分。总体而言,人格权侵害禁令的审查程序应当介于诉讼程序与非讼程序之间,情况紧急、作出临时禁令的应当接近非讼程序;其他情形则应当接近诉讼程序。法官审查In order to meet the demand for the supply of rules to stop infringement of personality rights in a timely manner,Article 997 of the Civil Code has added the injunction of personality right.However,the Civil Procedure Law,which has yet to be amended,does not provide a supporting procedure for this,and the Civil Code does not make corresponding provisions.So it is necessary to analyze how to construct the system of the injunction of personality right.The prerequisite for the construction of the system is to clarify its nature.But the academic community has not yet formed a consensus on the nature of the injunction of personality right:most hold that it is an interlocutory injunction,a minority of views hold that it is a perpetual injunction.Because of the fact that it is borrowed from foreign systems,the nature of the borrowed object and the corresponding rules are of great significance to the analysis of the nature of China’s injunction of personality right and its construction.So this paper starts from the tracing of the system,combining the nature and function of the borrowed object and the local context of China,analyzing the nature of China’s injunction of personality right and putting forward suggestions for its improvement.The injunction of personality right in China is derived from the injunction system under the common law,rather than directly from the interdictum or interdictum prohibitoria under the Roman law.The common law injunction system includes both permanent and temporary relief,as well as other orders issued by judges;both the content of property preservation and the content of act preservation,as well as the content of behavioral payment judgment.For the majority view,there are insufficient grounds treating the injunction of personality right as an interlocutory injunction.An injunction system that is not independent of litigation duplicates our established system.A more appropriate solution is to make the injunction of personality right independent of litigation,so that it has a relatively

关 键 词：人格权侵害禁令 民法典 临时救济 行为保全 人格权诉讼 

分 类 号：D923[政治法律—民商法学]