《涉外民事关系法律适用法》第4条司法实践评析

Judicial Practice Comment on Article IV of Law Concerning the Application of Laws on Foreign-related Civil Relations

《涉外民事关系法律适用法》第4条的规定使'干涉性法规'在我国立法中崭露头角,但由于该条规定过于笼统模糊,'干渉性法规'在学术研究层面尚存若干争议,在条文认定方面始终难有统一标准,亦导致实践中法官对该制度的理解莫衷一是。通过案例评析解读单边冲突规范与干涉性法规的差异之处,为劳动者权益保护法规与《证券法》规范的定性提供依据,并对《海商法》第四章是否属于'干涉性法规'深入分析,为该制度与法律规避、公共秩序保留适用混淆现状提供解决途径,能够在一定程度上克服司法实践中对'干涉性法规'制度适用不当之种种状况,为解决当前该制度存在的桎梏提供出路。

The Article IV of Law of the Application of Law for Foreign-related Civil Relations makes the'Eingriffsnormen'to prominence in our country’s legislation.However,because the provisions of this article are too general and vague,there are still some disputes on the academic research level about the'Eingriffsnormen'.It is always difficult to have a unified standard in terms of provisions identification,which also leads to different understanding of the system by judges in practice.Through case analysis,the authors interpret the differences between unilateral conflict norms and interfering laws and regulations,provide a basis for the qualitative analysis of labor rights protection regulations and Securities Law norms,and deeply analyze whether Chapter IV of the Maritime Code belongs to'Eingriffsnormen',which provides a solution to the confusion between the system and the circumvention of laws and the preservation of public order,and can overcome the confusion of the improper applications of the'Eingriffsnormen'system in judicial practice to a certain extent,which can provide a way out to solve the shackles of the current system.