“有利于”类型冲突规范的适用模式及其论证方法

On the Applicable Mode and Argument Method of the “Favorable” Type of Conflict Rules

作为《涉外民事关系法律适用法》采用的一种新的立法形式,"有利于"类型冲突规范在我国的适用情况并不理想,一方面司法实践中存在"司法规避"现象;另一方面由于对"有利于保护弱者权益的法"的认识存在偏差,学者所提出的适用方法也存在难以操作的问题。从法社会学的角度看,"有利于"类型冲突规范中引入"有利于保护弱者权益的法"的根本目的在于实现弱者权益保护的预期后果。将"有利于"类型冲突规范的适用区分为找法过程和法律选择正当化过程两个层面,可使"有利于"类型冲突规范的司法适用具备一个完整的、与法律实践更相契合的逻辑结构。为解决司法实践中存在的"司法规避"问题,应强化法官对裁判结果的论证,并通过可普遍性检验、一致性检验和协调性检验来保证后果主义论证的严谨性和合法性。

As a new form of legislation adopted in the Law on the Application of Law on Foreign-related Civil Relations, the application of "favorable" type of conflict rules is not ideal in China. On the one hand, there is so-called "judicial evasion" in judicial practice;On the other hand, due to the deviation of the understanding of "law for protecting the rights and interests of the weak", the applicable methods put forward by scholars are difficult to operate. From the sociology of law point of view, the basic purpose of the introduction of "law for the protection of the rights and interests of the weak" in the "favorable" type of conflict rules is to realize the anticipated consequences of the protection of the rights and interests of the weak. To divide the application of "favorable" type of conflict rules into two levels: the process of finding a law and the process of legitimizing the choice of law, it can make the judicial application of the "favorable" type of conflict rules have a complete and more consistent logical structure with the legal practice. In order to solve the problem of "judicial evasion" in judicial practice, we should strengthen the process of judge’s consequentialist argument, and ensure the strictness and legitimacy of consequentialist argument through the universality test, consistency test and coherence test.