法律行为内容评判的个案审查比对方法——兼谈民法典格式条款效力规范的解释

法律行为内容评判的个案审查比对方法——兼谈民法典格式条款效力规范的解释

The Method of Case-by-Case Scrutiny and Comparison for the Examination of the Content of Juristic Acts

    期刊名称：《法学研究》
    期刊年份：
    作者：李世刚
    单位：
    中文关键词：法律行为;公序良俗;强制性规定;格式条款
    英文关键词：juristic acts; public order and good morals; imperative provisions; standard terms
    中文摘要：
    法律行为的规范属性提出了把控意思自治的制度需求，即从内容切入，比照两个规范（法律行为与公序）所涉利益之冲突并确定法律行为的效力。由此，法律行为内容评判应遵循个案审查比对的方法：法官识别出“公序”规则及其保护的利益，并以之与个案中违反公序的法律行为之具体内容进行比对。该方法的展开涉及评判的依据、实质标准和制裁三个方面。其中，公序为依据；公序所特别保护之利益是否被损害为实质标准；公序保护之利益可区分为公共利益与个体利益，制裁方式也可相应区分为法律行为绝对无效与相对无效（可撤销）。上述法律行为内容评判路径的功能和方法，有助于解释我国民法典中作为一般条款的第153条与第154条以及规范格式条款效力的第496条与第497条。
    英文摘要：
    The normative nature of juristic acts raises the institutional demand for controlling the autonomy of will, namely, taking the content of a judicial act as the starting point to compare the conflicting interests involved in two norms (judicial acts and public order), so as to determine the validity of the juristic acts. Therefore, the method of case-by-case scrutiny and comparison should be adopted in the determination of the legality of the content of a juristic act. The judge should identify the rule of "public order" and the interests it protects, and compare with the interests with the specific content of the juristic act in an individual case. Specifically, it takes public order as the basis, and whether the interests protected by the public order are damaged as the substantive criterion. Interests protected by public order may be divided into public interests and individual interests, and the corresponding sanctions may also be divided into absolute nullity and relative nullity (voidable) of a juristic act. The above functions and methods of analysis on the legality of the content of juristic acts are helpful to interpret Articles 153 and 154 of the Chinese Civil Code that are general terms, and Articles 496 and 497 of the Code that concern the rules on the validity of standard terms.
    全文阅读：  点击下载