【摘要】 我国现行立法分别由《民法通则》和《合同法》对代理制度进行调整,前者恪守代理的显名原则,后者对代理人以自己名义从事代理的法律效果进行调整,形成总则与分则分别规范直接代理和间接代理的局面。究其原因,在于同时引进英美法系的不披露本人的代理、隐名代理以及大陆法系的行纪制度,最终导致现行代理立法格局混乱,多种代理类型交叉并存。间接代理和隐名代理经由中国特色的本土化改造,逐渐偏离比较法上的含义。在我国现行法已承认隐名代理的前提下,民法典在编纂过程中应当在间接代理和隐名代理之间作出选择。已颁布的《民法总则》和多个建议稿对隐名代理制度和间接代理制度应否在民法典中设置的态度有所不同。在建立广义代理概念的基础上,将隐名代理设置于总则,间接代理交由分则调整是民法典编纂的可行选择。更多还原

【Abstract】 The current legislation of China has adjusted the agency system respectively in the General Principles of the Civil Law and Contract Law. The former strictly abide by the principle of name in agency, the latter adjust the legal effect that an agent use his own name to engage in agency. These formed the situation that direct agency and indirect agency are used to regulate in general rules and specific provisions respectively. the reason lies in referencing both common law system and civil law system, the regulations contain undisclosed principal agency, unidentified principal agency and brokerage,consequently, which eventually lead to the circumstances of legislative confusion and coexistence with several agency types. The Chinese characteristics definitions of Indirect agency and unidentified principal agency are deviation from comparative law. Under the premise of acceptance with unidentified principal agency, it should be selected between indirect agency and unidentified principal agency during the codification of civil code. The attitude whether indirect agency should be stipulated in civil code are different among the General Provisions of Civil Law and several draft proposals. Based on establishing the agent concept of broad sense, it is a proper way to regulate unidentified principal agency in general provisions,while indirect agency in specific provisions.更多还原