《民法总则》变更权之殇——兼论中国法律发展的自主性问题

Premature Death of the Right of Alteration in China General Provisions of Civil Law——On the Autonomous of China Law Development

《民法总则》在法律行为效力的规范点上,突然废除了《民法通则》《合同法》创立、演变至今的变更权制度。变更权制度在我国法上存在严重的规范不足,在学术史上变更权也没有得到足够充分的重视。意思表示瑕疵或法律行为效果失衡使得不同的表意人、当事人产生不同的利益诉求,单独的撤销权并不能完全替代实现变更权可以实现的规范目的。变更权在我国法上具有体系正当性,区分救济的差异利益诉求类型从而配置变更权,而非一概废除变更权,才是我国《民法总则》及民法典的正确选择,亦是中国法律发展自主性的应然要求。从立法论角度考虑,在民法典合同编之中应当维持并完善合同法领域的变更权,甚或直接修订《民法总则》的对应规则;从解释论的角度考虑,变更权可以通过司法解释或法教义学的操作,继续存在于纠纷解决的司法实践之中。

The right of alteration was suddenly abolished without reason in China General Provisions of the Civil Law,which has long existed in China law system since general principles of civil law to contract law.There are very serious shortages in the institution system of this right,and only a few scholar have paid attention to this right in its own history.The different parties have different interest requisitions when there are defects in the declaration of will or imbalance in the effect of juristic act,and only the right of revocation could not replace the right of alteration to achieve its own aims.In Chinese civil law system the right of alteration has been justifiably located,and the correct choice of China Civil Law is to deploy the right of revocation based on the different types of interest requisitions,which also is the demand of the autonomy of Chinese legal development.In the view of legislation,the right of alteration should be maintained and perfected in the contract law part of China Civil Law,even to revise directly the corresponding rules.In the view of explanation, the right of alteration could continue to exist in future judicial practice by means of judicial explanation or legal dogmatics.