民法上法律行为效力若干问题的法理探析

【作者】 张丽丽；

【导师】 石茂生；

【作者基本信息】 郑州大学 ， 法学理论， 2009， 硕士

【摘要】 传统民法上法律行为系私法自治的主要实现者,意思表示是法律行为的核心。传统民法上法律行为不受合法性的限制,我国立法上把民法上的法律行为规定为合法行为的做法,弊大于利,应回归到传统法律行为理论上来。法律行为发生效力的法理依据应采取将意思与法律规范相结合的观点。在社会生活实践中,意思表示时有瑕疵。意思表示瑕疵可分为意思与表示不一致和意思表示不自由两种,应当与无瑕疵的意思表示在规范法律行为效力上有所区别,才能实现意思表示与法律行为效力关系上的制衡。而意思与表示不一致又可分为意思与表示故意不一致和意思与表示偶然不一致(意思表示错误)两种。意思与表示故意不一致主要表现为:真意保留或心中保留、虚伪行为和戏谑行为或缺乏真意三种情形,而且法律后果有所不同。真意保留或心中保留的意思表示不因之而无效,但相对人明知者不再此限;虚伪的意思表示无效,但不得以其无效对抗善意第三人;戏谑行为或缺乏真意的意思表示无效,但应赔偿相对人信赖利益的损失。在意思表示错误的情形下,首先推崇“误载无害真意”的解释原则。意思表示错误的,表意人无过失时,在除斥期间内法律行为效力系属可撤销,但应对相对人信赖利益的损失予以赔偿,以彰显公平。意思表示不自由的情形,可以区分为欺诈与胁迫,也属可撤销的法律行为,但欺诈由第三人所为者,以相对人明知其事实或可得而知者为限,才可以撤销。法律行为效力的外部限制,主要表现在法律行为内容受到国家强制与公序良俗的限制。法律行为,违反强制或禁止性之规定者,原则上无效,但这应被认为是一个具有概括功能的条款——需要法官以个案衡量。更多还原

【Abstract】 The principle of the autonomy in private law is mainly expressed in the systemof civil legal acts, whose corn content is expression on mind .Civil legal acts isn’tlimited by lawful action, but civil legal acts in our legislation is lawful action.Theauthor thinks this is not reasonable. The legal force of civil legal acts is derived fromcombination of the mind and the law.In social life, expression on mind is oftenimperfect .Imperfect expression on mind can divided into two things, including notonly disagreement between mind and expression but also expression on mind withoutfreedom, which is different from flawless expression on mind in controlling theeffectiveness of civil legal acts in order to control and balance the relationshipbetween expression on mind and the effectiveness of civil legal acts .Disagreementbetween mind and expression includes knowing disagreement between mind andexpression and mistaking it .Knowing disagreement between mind and expressionappears mainly in the form of intention reservation, false expression, and jokesresulting in different legal consequences .Intention reservation does not mean that theresult invalid , excluding what the others know . False expression is invalid, but is ineffective against the bonafide third parties. Jokes is invalid,but the person whothinks just joking should compensate for the losses of faith benefit. A mistake shouldbe firstly explained on principles of searching the real meaning . The faultless personwho express a mistake meaning can enforce his cancellation right if the period ofimmunity expires and should compensate for the other’s losses of faithbenefit .Expression on mind without freedom, including cheating and force, isrevocable .The cheating which a third party makes can be revocable when the otherhas known or should have been known the cheating.The external limit of the effectiveness of civil legal acts mainly appears that civil legal acts are limited by mandatory rules and public order and moral. Civil legal acts contrary to mandatory rules are invalid in principle, but specific issue, concrete analysis, the need for case-by-case measure of the judges.更多还原