债权多重转让规则的体系性解释——兼评《合同编通则解释》第50条  

A Systematic Interpretation of the Rule of Multiple Assignment of Creditor’s Rights--Commenting on Article 50 of the Interpretation of General Rules for Contract Preparation

作　　者：周晓莉 李坤刚[1] ZHOU Xiaoli;LI Kungang(Law school,Anhui University,Hefei,Anhui 230601,China)

机构地区：[1]安徽大学法学院,安徽合肥230601

出　　处：《中州大学学报》2024年第3期47-51,共5页Journal of Zhongzhou University

基　　金：安徽省哲学社会科学规划项目“新就业形态职业伤害问题与保障制度研究”(AHSKQ2021D05)。

摘　　要：《合同编通则解释》第50条对一般性债权多重让与规则规定了“通知优先,特殊情况时间优先”的优先清偿顺序。但该条既未提供完整规范,且给定的规则亦有不明晰之处。债权让与通知规则应以保护债务人为原则,而为了保障交易安全而加重债务人负担完全属于弄错重点。第50条似欲与《民法典》第768条主动接轨,但第768条有其自身的漏洞和硬伤。通知优先规则与《民法典》第546条冲突,也无法解释第二受让人取得债权的正当性。因此,第50条不宜被解释为已采纳通知优先规则,其第1款最后一句也应被解释为在债务人向第一受让人履行时不适用。Article 50 of the Interpretation of the General Principles of Contracts provides for a priority order of satisfaction for general claims with multiple assignments in which“notice takes precedence,and time takes precedence in special cases”.However,the article does not provide a complete specification and the rule given is unclear.The rule of notice of assignment of claims should be based on the principle of protection of the debtor,and it is entirely misplaced to burden the debtor in order to safeguard the security of the transaction.Article 50 seems to be in line with Article 768 of the Civil Code,but Article 768 has its own loopholes and weaknesses.The priority of notice rule conflicted with article 546 of the Civil Code and did not justify the acquisition of claims by second assignees.Therefore,article 50 should not be interpreted as adopting the priority of notification rule and the last sentence of its first item should not be applied when the debtor performs against the first assignee.

关 键 词：债权多重让与 保理合同 债权让与通知 债权让与规则 

分 类 号：D923.6[政治法律—民商法学]