合同违法无效规则中行为规范与权限规范的区分——以《合同编通则解释》第18条为中心  

The Distinction between Mandatory Rules and Enabling Rules in the Rule of Invalidity of Illegal Contract-Centered on Article 18 of the Judicial Interpretation of the General Provisions of the Book on Contract of the Civil Code

作　　者：易军[1] Yi Jun

机构地区：[1]中国政法大学民商经济法学院

出　　处：《环球法律评论》2024年第6期45-63,共19页Global Law Review

基　　金：2023年度国家社会科学基金重点项目“社会主义核心价值观与民法典价值体系研究”(23AFX003)的研究成果。

摘　　要：《民法典》第153条第1款中“强制性规定”的范围广泛,在文义上至少可以涵盖宪法规定、公法规定、社会法规定和私法强制性规定等。从目的解释而言,其范围应予限缩。《合同编通则解释》第18条的重要意义,在于将强制性规定区分为“行为规范”与“权限规范”,并将“权限规范”排除在该第153条第1款“强制性规定”的适用范围之外。我国长期以来就该款“强制性规定”的范围存在包括或不包括权限规范两种不同观点;司法实务中,则存在着较普遍地混淆行为规范与权限规范的做法。近年来该“强制性规定”不包括权限规范的共识渐趋形成。区分行为规范与权限规范深具必要性,二者在内涵、行为人自治程度、实践理念、有无“真正的违反”、规范违反的后果等方面均存在实质性差异。这一区隔具有符合立法理性要求、助益维护私人自治、纯粹化合同违法无效规则的规范功能等重要价值。Article 153 Paragraph 1 of the Chinese Civil Code stipulates that:"A jurid-ical act violating the imperative provisions of any law or administrative regulation shall be void unless the imperative provisions do not result in the nullity of the juridical act."The scope of"imperative provisions"in this paragraph is broad,covering at least constitutional provisions,provisions of public law,provisions of social law,and imperative provisions of private law in the literal sense.However,from the perspective of purposive construction,this scope should be limited.For example,although constitutional provisions are imperative provisions,they are not suitable for application through Article 153 Paragraph 1 of the Civil Code and therefore do not fall within the meaning of"imperative provisions"in this paragraph.As far as imperative provi-sions of private law are concerned,they can textually encompass both mandatory and enabling rules.The significance of Article 18 of the Judicial Interpretation of the General Provisions of the Book on Contract of the Civil Code lies in the division of imperative provisions into"manda-tory rules"and"enabling rules"and the exclusion of"enabling rules"from the scope of appli-cation of"imperative provisions"in Article 153 Paragraph 1 of the Civil Code.In China,through exploration in practice,a consensus has gradually formed that the"imperative provi-sions"of Article 153 Paragraph 1 of the Civil Code do not include mandatory rules.It is neces-sary to distinguish between mandatory rules and enabling rules.A mandatory rule is a norm that orders parties to do or not to do a certain thing and compels parties to act according to the choices they prescribe,with the aim of influencing or changing people's behavior.An enabling rule is a norm that defines the boundaries of the formation and disposition of rights and obliga-tions in civil law.In addition to different connotations,there are substantive differences be-tween the two kinds of rule in terms of the degree of autonomy of the parties,the idea of pra

关 键 词：强制性规定 行为规范 权限规范 私人自治 

分 类 号：D923.6[政治法律—民商法学]