应收账款“不适格”对保理合同效力的影响

Effect of Account Receivables“Inappropriateness”on Validity of Factoring Contract

近年来,商业保理的规范发展迎来了前所未有的广阔空间,有关保理合同效力认定的纠纷也随之增多,其核心原因在于应收账款“不适格”。通过分析司法实务界的相关裁判,应收账款“不适格”主要包括虚构的应收账款、不具有合理期待可能性的未来应收账款以及未实际转让的应收账款。司法实务在认定此类合同效力时也存在“有效说”“无效说”以及构成“名保实贷”等截然不同的观点。为规范应收账款“不适格”效力认定标准,应根据应收账款“不适格”不同表现形式,做到具体情形具体分析。虚构的应收账款应基于保理人是否知情判断合同效力;未来应收账款应以其是否具有转让性作为判定合同效力的依据;未实际转让的应收账款,若实际构成质押借贷法律关系的则应认定为“名保实贷”,若仅是转让未通知债务人的则不影响保理合同的效力。

In recent years,the normative development of commercial factoring has ushered in an unprecedented broad space,and the disputes related to the validity of factoring contract have also increased,the core reason is the the“inappropriateness”of the account receivables.Through the analysis of relevant judgments in judicial practice,the“inappropriateness”of account receivables mainly includes three forms:fictitious account receivables,expected receivables without reasonable possibility of expectation and receivables without actual transfer.In judicial practice,there are totally different views on the validity of such contracts,such as“validity”,“invalidity”and“factoring in form,loan in essence”.In order to perfect the validity standard of account receivables“inappropriateness”,the expression form of account receivables“inappropriateness”should be regarded as the judgment standard.Fictitious account receivables should be based on whether the factoring is aware of the validity of the contract;The expected receivables should be judged on the basis of whether they are transferable or not.The receivables without actual transfer shall be regarded as“factoring in form,loan in essence”if they actually constitute the legal relationship of pledge loan.If they are only transferred without notice to the debtor,the validity of factoring contract will not be affected.