非典型合同纠纷案中相似性的结构识别法

Structural Identification Method of Similarity in Atypical Contract Cases

我国《民法典》规定非典型合同可以参照适用最相类似典型合同的规定,非典型合同法律适用理论以因式分解法识别非典型合同与典型合同的相似性,而其他理论以构成要件类似说、实质一致说等方法识别相似性。在抵押监管合同纠纷案与股权收益权转让合同纠纷案中,前者适用了因式分解法,后者适用了其他识别方法,非典型合同纠纷案裁判中存在相似性识别方法的选择与完善问题。因式分解法从混合合同中分解出典型合同(成分)以确定比较节点,它无法适用于衍生合同,而其他识别方法在适用于非典型合同纠纷案时难以确定比较节点,且上述方法均忽视了最相类似论证。以因式分解法为基础且汲取其他识别方法中的类似程度论证方法,可以提出结构识别法,该方法以典型合同为比较节点,分析典型合同与非典型合同之间的衍生或合成关系,从合同目的、权利义务等参数上进行最相类似论证,以完善非典型合同纠纷案中相似性的识别方法。

Chinese Civil Code provides that atypical contract can refer to the provisions of the most similar typical contract.On the recognition of similarity,the atypical contract theory uses factorization method to identify the similarity between atypical contract and typical contract,while other theories use other methods such as the similarity theory of constituent elements and the substantial agreement theory to identify the similarity.In the mortgage supervision contract cases and equity income right transfer contract cases,the former applies the factorization method,while the latter applies other identification methods,which leads to the problems with the selection and improvement of similarity identification method in these cases.The factorization method takes the typical contract as the factor and decomposes it according to the structural characteristics of the mixed contract,but it cannot be applied to the derivative contract,while other identification methods are difficult to solve the logical dilemma of infinite subdivision of nodes and fails to target the structural characteristics of the atypical contract due to its generality.They all despise the most similar argument.By integrating and optimizing the above two kinds of methods,the structural identification method can be proposed.This method takes typical contracts as the comparison node,analyzes the derivative or composite relationship between typical contracts and atypical contracts,and conducts the most similar argument from the contract purpose,rights and obligations,so as to improve the similarity identification method in the judgment of atypical contract disputes.