债法总则消亡史

债法总则消亡史

The Dying History of the General Provisions of the Obligation Law in China

    期刊名称：《法学研究》
    期刊年份：
    作者：朱庆育
    单位：
    中文关键词：债法总则;民事责任;民法典;合同编;侵权责任编
    英文关键词：general provisions of the obligation law; civil liability; Civil Code; the Part of Contract; the Part of Tort Liability
    中文摘要：
    我国民法典无债法总则之设置，并非偶然，而系数十年累积而成的强大立法惯性使然。立法史上，债法总则仅出现于1950年代第一次民法典编纂。此后出现两项抑制债法总则的关键因素：一是1960年代确立的静态财产所有与动态财产流转二分格局，二是1980年代侵权责任独立成编与合同编分庭抗礼。两项因素所代表的法典观念与技术通过民法通则及环民法通则单行法，不断强化排斥债法总则的惯性。在由单行法直接转换为法典各编的编纂原则下，债法总则终遭2020年民法典舍弃。
    英文摘要：
    It is not an accident that the Chinese Civil Code does not contain the general provisions of the obligation law, but is the result of a strong legislative inertia accumulated over several decades. In Chinese legislative history, the general provisions of the obligation law appeared only in the first codification of civil law in the 1950s. Since then, there had been two key factors that inhibited the general provisions of the obligation law, i.e., firstly, in the 1960s, the unique dichotomy of static property ownership and dynamic property transfer was established, and secondly, in the 1980s, the tort liability law and the contract law were independent of each other. The ideas and technologies of the code represented by these two factors have continuously strengthened the inertia of rejecting the general provisions of the obligation law through the General Principles of the Civil Law and the separate laws surrounding it. Under the codification principle of direct conversion from a separate law to a part of the civil code, the general provisions of the obligation law were finally abandoned by the Chinese Civil Code promulgated in 2020.
    全文阅读：  点击下载