债权人代位权与撤销权同时行使之质疑

Querying Simultaneous Exercise of Creditor's Subrogation and Revocation Rights

《民法典分编(草案)》(二审稿)第331条第2款关于债权人代位权和撤销权同时行使的规定具有独创性,但其合理性存疑。本文认为,债权人代位权与撤销权制度功能上的差异是同时行使的理论障碍。二者同时行使导致制度功能、适用对象、行使范围的混淆,代位权和撤销权的构成要件并不相同,也难以同时行使。虽然两种保全措施的行使效力存在差异,但这并非撤销权的制度缺陷,而是该制度的内在要求,不宜通过同时行使规则而予以改变。

Article 331(2)of the " Civil Code Subdivision(Draft)"(Second Edition)entitles creditors to exercising subrogation right and rescission right simultaneously.Although this arrangement looks innovative,it does not have solid theoretical grounds.This paper argues that creditors’ Subrogation Right and Rescission Right cannot be exercised in an accumulated manner because they are functionally different and have different constitutive requirements.The proposed combination approach is likely to incur multiple interpretative difficulties,such as the difficulty to identify the scope of application of the two rights.Indeed,the right to rescind a contract does not provide sufficient protection to creditors.But this is the inherent nature of the Rescission Right s and can hardly be mitigated by combining it with the right to subrogate.