表见代理中的被代理人可归责性
朱虎表见代理中的被代理人可归责性
Imputability of the Principal in Apparent Agency
期刊名称：《法学研究》
期刊年份：
作者：朱虎
单位：中国人民大学民商事法律科学研究中心;中国人民大学法学院
中文关键词：表见代理;善意取得;信赖保护;可归责性;风险归责
英文关键词：apparent agency;good faith acquisition;protection of reliance;imputability;principle of risk
中文摘要：
关于表见代理，民法总则延续了合同法的规定形式，就表见代理构成中是否要求被代理人的可归责性仍然不清晰。采取积极信赖保护方式的善意取得和表见代理具有结构相似性，可透过善意取得规范抽取出权利外观责任的一般性评价，因此，与善意取得的构成相一致，表见代理的构成中也应包括被代理人的可归责性，且应采取风险归责原则予以解释和具体构建。该原则具有动态综合权衡的特征，为实现确定性可予以具体化。此时应区分不同案例类型，比较权衡行为人的信息成本、被代理人的防免成本、被代理人是否获益、双方的救济成本和商事交易的特性等因素，分别予以实质性论证，将风险归责原则具体化到不同案例类型的规则中。同时，即使被代理人不具有可归责性因此不承担积极信赖保护责任，但其仍可能要承担消极信赖保护责任，以实现法律后果方面的比较权衡。
英文摘要：
As to apparent agency, the General Part of Civil Code of PRC still continues the provision mode in the Contract Law, and do not provide clearly whether the elements of apparent agency should include the imputability of the principal. There is a similarity in basic structure between good faith acquisition and apparent agency that adopts the mode of positive protection of reliance. By analyzing the norms on good faith acquisition in the currently effective Chinese laws, a general value judgment involved in the responsibility derived from the appearance of right can be extracted. In line with the elements of good faith acquisition, the elements of apparent agency should also include the imputability of the principal, which should be interpreted and constructed according to the principle of risk. This principle has the characteristic of dynamic and integrated balance. In order to lend concreteness to this principle, we should distinguish different types of cases and make substantive argumentation respectively, so that definite rules can finally be obtained. In this process, different factors, such as the information cost of the agent, the cost of avoidance of the principal, the profit of the principal, the remedy cost of both parties and the characteristic of commercial transactions, should be balanced. At the same time, even if the principal needs not bear the responsibility of positive protection of reliance because of the absence of his imputability, he may still need to bear the responsibility of negative protection of reliance, so as to realize a balance of legal consequences.
全文阅读： 点击下载
