诚信原则修正功能的个案运用——以最高人民法院“华诚案”判决为分析对象
于飞诚信原则修正功能的个案运用——以最高人民法院“华诚案”判决为分析对象
Application of the Amendment Function of the Principle of Good Faith in Individual Cases
期刊名称：《法学研究》
期刊年份：
作者：于飞
单位：
中文关键词：建设工程施工合同;无效;制度滥用;诚信原则;权衡
英文关键词：construction contract; invalidity; abuse of legal system; principle of good faith; balance
中文摘要：
“华诚案”中，最高人民法院在适用无效规则产生严重不妥当的个案后果时，以诚信原则修正无效规则并认定合同有效。以立法目的为边界区分目的性限缩与法律修正，“华诚案”中的方法论工具是诚信原则的修正功能。一方当事人以自己违法为由主张合同无效，滥用了无效法律制度，构成制度滥用。结合案情尤其是该案中的“特殊情形”即建设工程施工合同已经基本履行完毕并且工程验收合格，权衡的结论是，实现原则的重要性超过了支持适用规则的实质理由与形式理由之和，应当依据诚信原则修正规则。诚信原则修正功能的思维过程可整理为：严格适用规则会产生严重不妥当的后果；查明规则的立法目的，并证明本案无法在立法目的范围内妥当处理；引入新的权衡要素即诚信原则；权衡；修正规则，产生但书。
英文摘要：
In the "Huacheng Case", the Supreme People's Court amended the rule of invalidity based on the principle of good faith and affirmed the validity of the contract when the application of the rule of invalidity would result in serious improper consequences in an individual case. Taking the legislative purpose as the boundary to make a distinction between purposive restriction and legal amendment, the court used the amendment function of the principle of good faith as the methodological tool in the "Huacheng Case". In this case, one party, by claiming that the contract was invalid on the ground of its own violation of law, abused the legal system of invalidity. In light of the facts of the case, especially the "special situation" in this case, that is, the construction contract had been basically fulfilled and the project had been accepted, and after balancing, the court came to the conclusion that the importance of the realization principle overrode the sum of the substantive and formal reasons for the application of the rule, and the rule should be amended in accordance with the principle of good faith. The process of the amendment function of the principle of good faith can be sorted out as follows:deciding that strict application of rules will produce serious improper consequences; ascertaining the legislative purpose of the rule and demonstrating that the case cannot be properly dealt with within the legislative purpose; introducing a new factor of balance, namely the principle of good faith; balancing; and amending the rule to produce the proviso.
全文阅读： 点击下载
