法定监护的局限性及其克服

Limitations of Legal Guardianship and Its Solutions

在《民法典》建立的监护人设立规范体系中,协议监护与指定监护是两种颇具特色的监护人设立方式。《民法典》之所以承续原《民法通则》及其司法解释之衣钵,沿用这两种监护人设立方式,是为了克服法定监护的规范局限性。法定监护作为一种重要的监护人设立方式,不可避免地会在各个顺位法定监护人之间引发争夺或推诿监护的监护人争议问题。为尊重《民法典》对法定监护予以首要规定的立法选择,应当立足于法定监护制度,体系性地理解指定监护与协议监护;不能撇开法定监护制度,以维护未成年人最佳利益和尊重监护人的自主选择为由,宽泛地理解《民法典》关于指定监护和协议监护的规定。

Guardianship by agreement and guardianship by appointment are two distinctive ways of establishment of guardian in the normal system of guardianship in Chinese Civil Code.The reason why the Civil Code inherits the former General Principles of Civil Law of the People's Republic of China and its judicial interpretation and adopts these two ways of guardian establishment is to overcome the normative limitations of legal guardianship.Legal guardianship,as an important way of guardian establishment,will inevitably lead to disputes among legal guardians.In order to respect the legislative choice of giving priority to legal guardianship in Civil Code,we should systematically understand guardianship by appointment and guardianship by agreement on the basis of legal guardianship system.We can't put aside the legal guardianship system,and interpret without limitation the provisions of the Civil Code concerning guardianship by appointment and guardianship by agreement according to the principle of the best interests of minors and the independent choice of the guardian.