论民法典合同编对可撤销合同变更权的有限保留

The Limited Reservation of the Right of Alternation of Revocable Contract in Contract of the Civil Code

成果信息
DC信息
传播影响力
本库下载频次:
本库浏览频次:
CNKI下载频次:0

归属学者：

侯国跃

归属院系：

民商法学院（知识产权学院）

作者：

侯国跃1 ;何鞠师

摘要：

《民法总则》没有沿袭《民法通则》《合同法》就可撤销合同变更权设置明文的传统,但在解释上否定变更权的依据并不充分。可撤销合同中的撤销权和变更权并非同一权利。保留可撤销合同的变更权不仅未违反意思自治原则和平等原则,而且还可缓和撤销权行使引发的僵化后果,进而符合鼓励交易的立法目的,在司法实践中也有特定的适用空间。在民法典合同编以追求市场经济繁荣发展为立法侧重的背景之下,在合同编优先于总则编适用的原则之上,保留可撤销合同中的变更权也具有可行性。可撤销合同中的变更权之制度构造,应合理协调和平衡合同各方当事人的利益。因显失公平、欺诈、胁迫而生撤销权时,应同时肯定这些情形所生的变更权;但基于重大误解而订立的合同并非任一方合同当事人故意导致,故在该情形之下不宜赋予当事人合同变更权。

出版日期：

2020-03-30

学科：

民商法学

收录：

CSSCI

提交日期：

2020-07-31

引用参考：

侯国跃;何鞠师. 论民法典合同编对可撤销合同变更权的有限保留[J]. 河南社会科学,2020(02):75-84.

  • dc.title
  • 论民法典合同编对可撤销合同变更权的有限保留
  • dc.contributor.author
  • 侯国跃;何鞠师
  • dc.contributor.author
  • Hou Guoyue;He Jushi
  • dc.contributor.affiliation
  • 西南政法大学民商法学院
  • dc.publisher
  • 河南社会科学
  • dc.publisher
  • Henan Social Sciences
  • dc.identifier.year
  • 2020
  • dc.identifier.issue
  • 02
  • dc.identifier.volume
  • v.28;No.214
  • dc.identifier.page
  • 75-84
  • dc.date.issued
  • 2020-03-30
  • dc.subject
  • 民法典合同编;可撤销合同;撤销权;变更权
  • dc.subject
  • Contract of the Civil Code;Revocable Contract;Right of Revocation;Right of Alternation
  • dc.description.abstract
  • 《民法总则》没有沿袭《民法通则》《合同法》就可撤销合同变更权设置明文的传统,但在解释上否定变更权的依据并不充分。可撤销合同中的撤销权和变更权并非同一权利。保留可撤销合同的变更权不仅未违反意思自治原则和平等原则,而且还可缓和撤销权行使引发的僵化后果,进而符合鼓励交易的立法目的,在司法实践中也有特定的适用空间。在民法典合同编以追求市场经济繁荣发展为立法侧重的背景之下,在合同编优先于总则编适用的原则之上,保留可撤销合同中的变更权也具有可行性。可撤销合同中的变更权之制度构造,应合理协调和平衡合同各方当事人的利益。因显失公平、欺诈、胁迫而生撤销权时,应同时肯定这些情形所生的变更权;但基于重大误解而订立的合同并非任一方合同当事人故意导致,故在该情形之下不宜赋予当事人合同变更权。
  • dc.description.abstract
  • The General Provisions of the Civil Law does not follow the tradition that the right of alternation of revocable contract is provided by the General Principles of the Civil Law and the Contract Law, however, it is not sufficient to deny the right of alternation on statutory interpretation. Right of revocation and right of alternation of revocable contract are not same rights. Retaining the right of alternation of revocable contract doesn't violate the principle of party autonomy and the principle of equality, and may mitigate rigid consequences arising from right of revocation, thus it can serve the legislative purpose of encouraging transactions and there is also a specific space for application in judicial practice. In the context of General Provisions of the Civil Code which pursues the prosperity of market economy and on the principle that Contract of the Civil Code takes priority over General Provisions in the Civil Code, it is feasible to retain the right of alternation of revocable contract. The systematic frame of revocable contract shall reasonably coordinate and balance the interests of each party to the contract. When the right of revocation arises from unconscionability、fraud、coercion, the right of alternation under such circumstances shall be affirmed at the same time, but the contract concluded on the basis of significant misconception is not intentionally caused by any party to the contract, therefore, it is not appropriate to grant the right of alternation under this circumstance.
  • dc.description.sponsorshipPCode
  • 20182018XZZD-06
  • dc.description.sponsorship
  • 西南政法大学2018年度校级科研重点项目“实体与程序双重视角下股权执行的疑难问题研究”（2018XZZD-06）
  • dc.identifier.CN
  • 41-1213/C
  • dc.identifier.issn
  • 1007-905X
  • dc.identifier.if
  • 0.539
  • dc.subject.discipline
  • D923.6
回到顶部