应当如何对待法律的沉默——以《合同编通则解释》为例  

How Should We Treat the Silence of the Law:Take the Interpretation of General Provisions of Contract Law as an Example

作　　者：崔建远[1,2] Cui Jianyuan

机构地区：[1]清华大学 [2]清华大学法学院

出　　处：《财经法学》2024年第4期3-14,共12页Law and Economy

基　　金：2022年度教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地重大项目“民法典违约责任规则的体系化审视研究”(22JJD820015)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：对待中国现行法的沉默,不宜囿于要么属于法外空间、要么使用反面推论的桎梏,可将法律漏洞纳入其中。对越权代表订立的合同,在相对人为恶意时,不应采取反面推论的法技术确定其法律效力。《合同编通则解释》第21条第1款第3句所谓“前述情形”,究竟包括哪些情形,有澄清和确定的必要。对以物抵债协议应首先区分以担保物抵债的协议和非以担保物抵债的协议,其次区分代物清偿和除此之外的以物抵债协议(新债清偿),以便容易、清晰地确定原债权债务关系是否自以物抵债协议成立和生效时归于消灭。对当事人关于排除情事变更原则适用的约定,不宜一概否认其法律效力,而应区分情况确定其法律效力。适用“破解合同僵局规则”解除合同,在违约方诉请解除合同时合同目的尚未落空的,不应一律以起诉状副本送达守约方之处时作为合同解除的时间点,不然就背离“破解合同僵局规则”的规范意旨、公平和诚信原则。在诉讼、仲裁的程序进行符合事物发展规律的情况下,裁判合同解除的法律文书送达之日作为合同解除的时间点,具有正当性。The silence on China's current law should not be confined to the shackles of either extralegal space or the use of negative inferences,and legal loopholes can be included in it.In the case of a contract concluded by an ultra vires representative,the legal effect of the contract should not be determined by negative inference,if the counterparty knew or ought to know that.It is necessary to clarify and determine what exactly the so-called“aforesaid circumstances”in the third sentence of paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the Interpretation of General Provisions of Contract Law include.For debt-in-rem agreements,a distinction should be made,firstly,between agreements in which debts are paid with collateral and agreements that are not secured by collateral,and secondly,between repayment in rem and agreements in rem(repayment of new debts),so that it is easy and clear to determine whether the original creditor-debtor relationship is extinguished when the agreement is concluded and takes effect.It is not appropriate to nullify the parties'agreement on exclusion of application of the principle of change of circumstances,but to determine its legal effect on a case-by-case basis.If the purpose of the contract has not been frustrated when the breaching party applies for the termination of the contract,the time of termination should not be the time when the copy of the complaint is sent to the non-breaching party,otherwise it will deviate from the purpose of the“rule for breaking the deadlock of contract”,as well as the principle of fairness and good faith.Under the circumstance that the proceedings of litigation or arbitration conform to the law of development,the date of service of the legal document adjudicating the termination of the contract should be the time of termination of the contract.

关 键 词：法律的沉默 反面推论 法律漏洞 越权代表 以物抵债协议 

分 类 号：D923.6[政治法律—民商法学]