债务清理上破产法与执行法的关系

Relationship Between Bankruptcy Law and Enforcement Law on Debt Collection

破产法与执行法同为债务清理法体系最重要的组成部分,这种本源上的共性要求破产法与执行法尽可能联动立法,且破产法原则上须尊重执行法。除非破产法的宗旨要求突破执行法,对关乎债务清理的共同问题的处理均应保持内在的逻辑一致性。这种共性也决定了破产法与执行法必有适用上的竞争,且适用边界无法人为划定。破产受理不畅的根源不应归咎于参与分配制度,而在于破产法自身欠缺吸引力,引入破产申请激励措施以增加当事人的破产申请动机,才是推动破产受理的根本路径。参与分配制度应定位为以同一执行程序处理金钱债权终局执行的竞合,具有独立于破产法的价值,其立法体例的选择也与破产法无关。破产法的宗旨在于以债的概括清理实现利害关系人整体利益的促进,对执行法的尊重若与该宗旨相冲突,破产法便不必受其拘束。破产法得突破执行法的当事人进行主义与形式化原则,更能直接对债的个别实现包括强制执行加以摒弃。

Both bankruptcy law and enforcement law are the most important components of the debt collection law system. This commonality in origin requires that their legislation should be interconnected to the greatest extent and that bankruptcy law should in principle respect enforcement law. Unless bankruptcy law is required by its purpose to break through enforcement law, the solutions to common problems related to debt collection should maintain internal logical consistency. This commonality also leads to their competition in terms of application, the boundary of which cannot be artificially drawn. The root cause of the bankruptcy-initiation problem lies not in the participation-distribution regime, but in the lack of attractiveness of bankruptcy law itself. Encouraging the filing of bankruptcy petitions by introducing incentive measures should be the fundamental resolution to this problem. The distribution-participation regime should be positioned as one dealing with competing final enforcement of monetary claims through the same procedure, with its function independent of and the choice of its legislative pattern irrelevant to bankruptcy law. The purpose of bankruptcy law is the promotion of the overall interests of all interested parties through collective debt collection. Bankruptcy law does not need to be bound by enforcement law if their purpose conflict. Bankruptcy law could break through enforcement law’s party-centrism and formalization principle, and more directly, reject the individual realization of debts, including compulsory enforcement.