实际施工人代位权之规范解释  

Normative Interpretation of the Right of Subrogation of Actual Constructors

作　　者：刘薇 欧阳国 Liu Wei;Ouyang Guo

机构地区：[1]南京大学法学院 [2]景德镇市中级人民法院民一庭

出　　处：《中国不动产法研究》2024年第2期114-128,312,313,共17页Research on Real Estate Law of China

基　　金：国家社科基金项目“区域协调发展视域下国土空间规划法治研究”(22BFX135)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：《最高人民法院关于审理建设工程施工合同纠纷案件适用法律问题的解释(一)》(法释[2020]25号)第43条规定的实际施工人“特别代位权”,在保全必要性上进行了不当扩张,又在客体范围上进行了不当限制,造成了实际施工人代位权类型异化,从而导致代位权权利滥用与功能抑制的后果。对实际施工人代位权进行“必要限制”,应有之义在于,扩充细化保全必要性内涵,根据保全债权类型的不同区分适用“无资力说”或“特定物债权说”的判断标准;对实际施工人代位权进行“合理扩张”,应遵循《民法典》功能主义释意的解释范式,将两类实际施工人代位权合并为一类,客体范围扩张解释为“到期债权或者与该债权有关的从权利”,并允许实际施工人代位行使建设工程价款优先受偿权。同时,法释[2020]25号第43条应理解为第44条之补充说明,仅作为对法院审理标准上的要求。涉及实际施工人提起代位权诉讼的,统一适用第44条规则处理。The"special right of subrogation"of the actual constructor stipulated in Article 43 of Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Issues concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Cases Regarding Disputes over Construction Contracts for Construction Projects(I)(Interpretation No.25[2020]of the Supreme People's Court)has been unduly expanded in terms of the necessity of preservation and,at the same time,improperly restricted in terms of the object scope,which has resulted in the alienation of the type of subrogation rights of the actual constructor and has led to the abuse of the right and the suppression of its function.The"necessary restrictions"on the right of subrogation of actual constructor should be understood as expanding and refining the connotation of preservation necessity.This involves distinguishing between the"no financial capability theory"or the"the theory of specific property claims"judgment criteria based on the different types of preservation claims.The"reasonable expansion"of the right should adhere to the interpretative paradigm of functionalism in the Civil Code.This combines the two types of subrogation of actual constructors into one,and expanding the scope of the object scope to include"due obligations or any right accessory thereto".It allows the actual constructor to exercise the right of priority compensation related with construction.At the same time,the article 43 of Interpretation No.25[2020]of the Supreme People's Court should be understood as a supplement to the article 44,serving only as requirements for the court's standard of review.As long as a lawsuit involves right of subrogation is brought by the actual constructor,the article 44 should be uniformly applied.

关 键 词：实际施工人 代位权 建设工程价款优先受偿权 

分 类 号：D923.6[政治法律—民商法学]