营利法人社会责任条款的法律内涵与裁判功能——以研究路径的反思为切入点阐释《民法总则》第86条

Profit-making Legal Person’s Social Responsibility Clauses:Legal Contents and Judgment Functions:A Study of Article 86 of“The General Provisions of Civil Code”

营利法人社会责任条款的法律适用一直存在重大困难,而导致适用困难的首要原因在于无法明晰该条款中的“社会责任”的法律内涵,进而无法明确该条款的裁判功能。该条款中的社会责任的法律内涵应取决于其所欲达到的规范目的,即对营利法人所产生的负外部性行为进行兜底的司法规制。在将被频繁用于我国公司社会责任法律内涵研究的三大理论:公司金字塔理论、利益相关者理论、法律与道德责任二分理论还原回公司社会责任的理论谱系中,发现三者的定位与功能并不契合《民法总则》第86条所预设的规范目的。不仅如此,充分地分析整个理论谱系后,发现谱系中没有任何理论契合《民法总则》第86条的规范目的。因此,合理地摆脱理论的路径依赖,转型从公序良俗、诚实信用两大概括条款的理论路径透视《民法总则》第86条以期实现所预设的规范目的。该条款中的“社会责任”的法律内涵是营利法人的商行为不得违反商业基本道德和商法体系的内在价值,其裁判功能可以分为“内容审查”和“行使审查”。法官在适用本条款进行“内容审查”和“行使审查”,须以自身的批判性思维综合经验主义标准、专家主义标准,寻求商业基本道德的价值共识,遵循论证规则和形式,通过法律论证的方式确定个案中的商行为是否违反商业基本道德。

There is a big problem with the profit-making legal person’s social responsibility clause in its application,the main reason being the obscure legal contents of the so-called“social responsibility”and the unclear judgment of that clause.In fact,the legal contents of its social responsibility depend on the designated purpose,that is,the underlying judicial constraints on the negative external acts of the profit-making legal person.There are three theories related to the research on the legal contents of Chinese companies’social responsibility,namely,the corporate pyramid theory,the stakeholder theory,and the bipartite theory of legal and moral responsibilities.Through our analysis we find the intentions and functions of the three theories do not apply to the designated purpose as presupposed in Article 86 of“The General Provisions of Chinese Civil Code”.Hence,we should try to avoid being entangled in the three theories but turn to public order and good customs as well as honesty and goodwill for our way out.Guided by these two principles,we are supposed to require the profit-making legal persons to follow benign business ethics and effective commercial law system while the judgment functions are assumed to consist of“content examination”and“enforcement examination”.The judges,while conducting the two examinations,should adopt a critical stance combining their perceptions with experience,experts’ideas and widely-endorsed commercial ethics.