【作者】 李芳；

【导师】 田洪鋆；

【作者基本信息】 吉林大学 ， 国际法学， 2016， 硕士

【摘要】 反致制度是基于国际私法特殊的冲突规范而发展出的一项特殊制度,产生至今已有一百多年的历史。在此过程中,关于反致制度的争论从未停止,赞成派和反对派主要围绕反致制度是否破坏了一国法律的完整性、是否尊重他国主权、能否达到法院判决结果的一致性、扩大本国法的适用范围是否合理以及是否不合理地增加了司法成本等几方面展开激烈争论。虽然赞成与反对的争论持续至今,但这并没有影响反致制度在时代进步中的理论发展与司法实践中的实际运用。相反国际社会中采用反致制度的国家日渐增多。这充分说明国际私法特有的反致制度是有其不可取代的功能与价值的,至少就反致制度目前的发展状况而言是显而易见的。反致制度在我国国际私法学界同样也引发了广泛讨论,但在立法实践中这一制度却遭到了彻底否定。韩德培教授曾言:“在探讨反致有无存在的必要的时候,主要看它是否符合国际私法的宗旨和本质,是否有利于调整国际民事法律关系,如果答案是肯定的,反致制度理应在国际私法中占有一席之地。”一项制度能否被一国采纳或在一国适用,是由该国具体国情和制度本身所共同决定的。一国对某一制度的需求程度,该国的法律思想、法律传统、立法技术、法治进程等因素,以及制度本身的价值目标、实际功能、对现实土壤的要求等都是我们在讨论这一问题时需要考虑的因素。同时一项法律制度的具体内容和一国的具体国情都是随着社会的发展和时代的进步不断变化的,我们应在新的时代背景与法律观念下研究一项法律制度是否应在一国适用。笔者认为反致制度应该在我国得到适用。为了论证这一观点文中首先分析、阐述了历史上我国排除适用反致制度的原因。其次,笔者考察了反致制度在我国适用的必要性和可能性。针对历史上我国排除适用反致制度的原因相应地进行了重新审视,对反致制度可以在我国适用的外部条件和现实土壤进行了一定的分析,表明反致制度在我国是具有适用可能性的。同时笔者也分析了我国对反致制度的现实需求,反致制度自身的独特功能对这些需求的满足恰能反映出反致制度在我国适用的必要性。所以我国应该转变对这一制度的态度,不应对其进行彻底否定。最后,针对反致制度在我国应如何适用的问题,笔者进行了相应的制度设计。转变对反致制度彻底否定态度只是一小步,如何使这一制度合理地融入我国国际私法体系内,防止出现法律制度之间的矛盾和空白才是更为关键的一步,同时呈现合理的制度设计也能够使这一制度在我国的适用更具有说服力。本文试图在《涉外民事关系法律适用法》对反致制度拒绝适用的背景下,重新提出反致制度在我国具有使用可能性的观点。对于这一观点的支撑,不再仅仅局限于反致制度的理论与逻辑圆满,而是从我国的实际情况出发,通过分析我国对反致制度的实际需求、我国适用反致制度的客观条件,并结合反致制度本身的价值与功能优势,阐述反致制度可以在我国适用的原因。同时又以切实可行的制度设计来增强这一观点的可靠性,也希望这一制度设计能有助于减少我国对其适用的后顾之忧。更多还原

【Abstract】 Renvoi, one of the special doctrines of the Private International Law, which is based on the conflict of laws, has a history of more than one hundred years. Throughout the process, the argument of it has never stopped. The two competing groups(i.e. one is in favor of the renvoi whereas the other is not) mainly argued on whether renvoi would destroy the integrity of the law of one country, whether it would respect the sovereignty of one country, whether it could achieve the consistency of the judgments of different countries, whether it would be advisable to adopt renvoi to increase the application of domestic law, which is more important between the flexibility of choice of law and the increasement of judicial cost because of the adoption of renvoi and so on. Although the arguing voice has never disappeared, it does not affect the academic development of renvoi doctrine and the practical application of it in the progressive times. On the contrary, there are more and more countries accepting renvoi doctrine, which implies that the special doctrine of Private International Law---renvoi---has its unique function and value, so far as the present developing condition is concerned.The argument on renvoi doctrine also exists in the Private International Law of China, but is suffered thorough denial in the judicial practice. However as Depei Han once said "when discussing the necessity of the existence of renvoi doctrine, we should focus on whether it conforms to the purpose and essence of the Private International Law, and whether it is good for the adjustment of international civil law relationship. If the answer is yes, then the renvoi doctrine should have a position in the Private International Law." Whether a doctrine can be adopted in one country is decided by the specific conditions of that country and the content of the doctrine itself. The factors we should take into consideration are the requirement of the doctrine in one country, the legal thoughts and tradition, the level of legal institutions and the legislative techniques when discussing the problem, just as the objectives and the practical requirements of the doctrine. And at the same time, the content of one regime and the specific conditions of one country are changing as the development of society and the progress of ages, so we should research the problem that whether one doctrine accords with one country at the background of new times.Thus the author observes renvoi doctrine should be adopted in our country. To demonstrate this the author first analyse the reasons why the doctrine can be accepted by us, implying that we should change our attitude towards this regime in legislation, instead of thoroughly denying it. Our country has the practical requirements for this doctrine, especially the protection of country’s benefits in the judgment of international civil and commercial cases. And we own the actual condition of applying the doctrine of renvoi. Because of the historical tradition and the specific factors, our legislation never involves renvoi, or it just denies it directly. But with the variation of our national conditions, the objective factors that restrict the application of the doctrine in our country has change. Therefore I hope we can analyse the reasons that we apply the doctrine of renvoi with changing eyes, in order to drive our attitude towards renvoi to change.Then comes the question of how to apply renvoi in China. I think it would be better if we establish a system to apply it. Changing the negative attitudes towards renvoi doctrine is just a small step, how to make it integrate into the existing system of laws and avoid the contradictions and gaps among the law systems is more pivotal. Meanwhile presenting the rational system design can also make the adoption of renvoi doctrine in our country more convicing.This paper shows the viewpoint of adopting renvoi doctrine in China in the background that the Application Law denies renvoi thoroughly. And the grounds of this point are no longer confined to the theoretical argument nor the completeness of logic. Instead, it regards the actual conditions as the basis, through analyzing the practical requirements for renvoi doctrine and the objective conditions for its adoption, combining with the feasible renvoi doctrine design to make the viewpoint more reliable, hoping to resolve the trouble that exists after the renvoi doctrine being applied in China.更多还原