摘要
恶意串通行为概念的模糊性导致我国《民法通则》第58条第1款第4项以及《合同法》第52条第2项在适用上的混乱。事实上,司法实践中依据该规定所判定的七种所谓的恶意串通行为在现行法或民法理论上都可以用其他规则予以调整。我国未来民法典总则没有必要设置关于恶意串通行为的一般规定,"恶意串通"仅限于滥用代理权。取而代之,应对通谋虚伪表示予以专门规定,采用相对无效的规范模式。
The ambiguity of the concept malicious collusion has resulted in confusion by applying article 58 paragraph 1 item 4 in General Principles of Civil Law and article 52 item 2 in Contract Law of our country. In fact, the seven kinds of malicious collusion identified according to these provisions in the judicial practice could be regulated by other norms or theories. It is unnecessary to set up a general provision in the general part of our country＇ s future civil code. ＂Malicious collusion＂ only includes abusing the authority of agency. As a substitute, a provision about collusive simulated act should be formulated. The collusive simulated act should be judged as relatively invalid.
出处
《比较法研究》
CSSCI
北大核心
2014年第4期106-121,共16页
Journal of Comparative Law
基金
教育部2013年度规划基金项目"意思表示理论中的风险原则及我国民法典立法对策"(13YJA820056)
上海市哲学社科规划项目"信赖保护视角下的民事法律行为效力制度"(2011BFX007)
上海市"曙光计划"项目(11SG51)的阶段性成果
关键词
恶意串通
虚伪表示
脱法行为
法律行为
民法典
malicious collusion
simulated act
evasion of law
legal act
civil code
