论“禁止法律规避”制度的废除——兼论我国国际私法法典相关制度的重构

On Abolishing the System of"Prohibition of Evasion of Law"——Also on the Reconstruction of Relevant Systems in the Code of International Private Law

禁止法律规避制度的要件构成理论存在如下悖论:对于无明文立法的模式而言,规避行为的判定与规避意图的认定互为前提,陷入自我循环论证误区。对于有明文立法的模式而言,其原则化立法易与私法体系背道而驰,其规则化立法则会陷入“规避法律—规则援用—自始未规避”的逻辑悖论。该制度在规则适用上存在制度性障碍:当事人无法制造连接点,因而缺乏规则实现的前提;在制造连接点以外存在同等实现法律规避的行为类型;依法待证的“规避恶意”因缺乏实体法与程序法基础而无法证成;其规则法律管教主义浓厚,且其本身容易构成冲突法悖论。该制度在法律体系上存在自我冲突,不当干预了当事人的意思自治,在现有的“直接适用的法”与“公共利益保留”体系框架下横亘其中,无所适从。该制度与现代国际私法潮流相背,在大多数国家的立法与司法实践中难觅踪迹。现行我国禁止法律规避制度的瑕疵和弊端频现。尚处在立法探索期的我国国际私法法典对法律规避的规范不应保留,要重构“目的—行为”体系,全面改革立法目的;对于作为准据法选择的进攻性工具,“直接适用的法”应采取谨慎立法态度,避免司法权滥用;对于作为准据法选择的防御性工具,“公共利益保留”应与我国国内法律体系相衔接。

Prohibition of evasion of law is a stain on the international private law of China.The theory of constituent elements of the system of prohibition of evasion of law is a paradox shown as follows:For the mode of being without express legislation,the determination of evasive behavior and the recognition of evasive intention are preconditions for each other,which falls into the paradox of self-circular argument.For the mode of being with explicit legislation,it is easy for the principle-based legislation to run counter to the system of private law,while rule-based legislation will fall into the logical paradox of"evasion of law-application of rules–non-evasion ab initio".For such system,there are institutional obstacles in the application of rules:the parties cannot create connecting points,so there is no prerequisite for the realization of rules;there are other types of behavior that equivalently realize the evasion of law in addition to the creation of connecting points;the"evasive malice"which should be proved according to law cannot be proved due to the lack of substantive-law and procedural-law basis;the rules of such system enjoy the strong nature of law as a disciplining tool,and the system itself is easy to constitute a paradox in the conflict of law.Such system is self-contradicted in terms of legal system,unduly interferes with the autonomy of the parties,and is standing between the existing system frameworks of"directly applicable law"and"the exception of public interest"and at a loss.This system is contrary to the trend of modern private international law and cannot be found in the legislative and judicial practice in most countries.In the code of international private law,which is still in the exploratory period of legislation,such system should not be kept,and it is necessary to reconstruct the doctrine of the system of"purpose-behavior"and reform the legislative aim in an all-round way.A cautious attitude should be adopted in the legislation towards the"directly applicable law"which serves as an offensive tool of choosing the applicable law to avoid the abuse of judicial power.As a defensive tool of choosing the applicable law,"the exception of public interest"should be compatible with the domestic legal system of China.