民法典体系下不当得利直索权之释明

The interpretation of direct recourse for unjust enrichment in civil code system

对于民法典第九百八十八条构成要件之解释,应当有别于文义,不能认为成立不当得利之债后单一的无偿转让行为要件即可成立不当得利权利人对第三人的直索权。基于不得损害第三人的类推原则,在给付连锁中双重瑕疵并且都尚未支付对价的情形、法定物权移转的情形中存在类推适用本条的空间;此外,立足于中国立法体系应当对本条作出限缩性解释,在得利人因无偿转让而免除返还责任或者得利人陷入支付不能的情形下成立直索权。如此可以与民法体系下的其他制度呼应,亦真正发挥不当得利直索权的作用。

The interpretation of the constituent elements of Article 988 of the Civil Code should be different from the text.It cannot be considered that the single element of free transfer after the establishment of the debt of unjust enrichment can establish the direct recourse for unjust enrichment against the third party.Based on the analogy principle of not harming the third party,there is field for analogy to apply this article in the case of double defects in the payment chain and the consideration has not been paid,and in the case of legal real right transfer.Based on the legislation system of our country,a direct claim should be established when the beneficiary is exempted from the liability of return due to the gratuitous transfer or the beneficiary is unable to pay.In this way,it can be echoed with other systems under the civil law system,but also really play the role of the direct recourse for unjust enrichment.