提存的法律效力

On the Legal Effects of Lodgment

《民法典》确立了较原《合同法》更为完善的提存制度,增加规定了债务人的取回权。《民法典》规定的取回权制度富有特色,即债权人已履行对债务人负有的到期债务的,债务人的取回权被排除。让提存直接发生消灭债权债务关系的效果,不仅不能给债务人带来进一步的实质解放,反而可能使债务人失去了取回提存物另作履行,或者主张诉讼时效抗辩权的余地。因此,"以提存消灭债务方能解放债务人"的观念应予破除。提存的本质应是提存部门作为债务人的履行辅助人,为债务人维持履行的提出,提存不应独立产生债务消灭的效果。债务人提存后,债之消灭仍应依赖于债权人对提存物的接受或者放弃,或者人民法院根据合法有效的提存作出消灭债务的判决。

The "Civil Code" establishes a more complete lodgment system than the "Contract Law", adds provisions for the debtor’s right of withdrawal, and uniquely makes the existence or extinction of the right of withdrawal depend on the corresponding payment of the creditor: If the creditor has fulfilled the due debt to the debtor, the debtor’s right of repossession will be excluded, and the lodgment will eventually have the effect of eliminating the debt. In fact, letting the lodgment have the effect of eliminating the creditor’s right and debt relationship without relying on the will of both parties will not only fail to bring further substantial "liberation" to the debtor, it will also make the debtor lose the opportunity to retrieve the lodgments for another performance, or to claim the right to defend the statute of limitations. Therefore, the misunderstanding that "the debtor can be liberated only by eliminating debts through lodgments" should be eliminated. The lodgment should not independently have the effect of eliminating the debt, and its essence should be that the lodgment department acts as the debtor’s performance assistant and provides for the debtor to maintain the proposal of performance. After the debtor has deposited, the elimination of the debt should still depend on the creditor’s acceptance or waiver of the deposit, or the court’s judgment on the elimination of the debt based on legal and effective lodgment.