《民法总则》中的代理制度重大争议问题

Major Controversies about the Agency System in General Part of Civil Law

显名代理包括明示显名代理与默示显名代理,《合同法》第402条规定的情形属于后者,《民法总则》第172条应解释为包含默示显名代理。《民法总则》第61条第3款不能完全取代《合同法》第50条,关于越权代表的效力,应将《民法总则》第61条第3款与第172条关于表见代理的规定结合起来予以判定。《民法总则》第171条在规定无权代理时未将《民法通则》第66条第1款第3句纳入其中,导致默示授权缺乏相应规定。《民法总则》第171条第3款关于无权代理人承担履行合同债务之责任的规定过于粗糙,应予以完善。

Named agency includes explicit named agency and tacit named agency. Article 402 of me Contract Law regulates the latter. Article 172 of the General Part of Civil Law should be interpreted as including tacit named agency. The third paragraph of article 61 of the General Part of Civil Law cannot completely replace article 50 of the Contract Law. The validity of ultra vires representation should be judged according to the combination of the third paragraph of article 61 and article 172 of the General Part of Civil Law. Concerning unauthorized agency, article 171 of the General Part of Civil Law does not incorporate sentence 3 of the first paragraph of article 66 of General Principles of Civil Law. As a result, it lacks a regulation about tacit authorization in the General Part of Civil Law.