共益债务的理论重构及其实践
|
摘要
对共益债务的科学认定,既关系全体债权人的利益,也关系债务人的利益。从理论上全面厘清共益债务的科学内涵,才能全面体现《破产法》平等保护债权人与债务人的立法宗旨。对共益债务内涵的理解,应全面把握它的两个基本属性和两个法律特征。两个基本属性即"共益性"和"在破产程序中",对其需要灵活掌握,力求克服当前学界对共益债务内涵理解上的保守和僵化倾向。对于共益债务的"共益"主体,理论上可作扩大理解至破产相关人,对"在破产程序中"的把握,则应始终坚持是否对全体债权人有利的原则,不必过分苛求引发债务的行为必须发生在破产程序启动之后。认识共益债务的内涵,还须抓住它的两个法律特征,即"以债务人的全部财产为担保"和"随时清偿",正是由于共益债务具有优于其他破产债权"优先受偿"的特点,在理论上探讨共益债务并力求在实践中对其作出科学认定才有意义。在学理上对共益债务的范围进行阐释,是构建共益债务理论的重要方面,有助于破产实践中正确认定和处理共益债务。对共益债务范围的把握,科学的方法是确立共益债务范围的标准。在学理上可以将确立共益债务范围的标准抽象为三个:"为债务人整体资产或具体资产保值增值所产生的债务"、"法律规定债务人应当承担的债务"以及"为清算、重整、和解等共益目的所产生的债务",这三个标准基本涵盖了共益债务的全部外延,避免了目前《破产法》列举式规定存在的不周延的缺陷。对共益债务种类在学理上进行探讨,同样是构建共益债务理论的重要一环。共益债务的种类在立法上可按债发生的根据对其进行逻辑重塑,同时对共益债务还可以按照债的发生是否取决于债权人或管理人的意志、是否具有劳务内容、是否有担保等标准进行分类。共益债务能否及时得到应有的清偿,对共益债权人尤其是主动性共益债务的共益债权人影响很大,也会间接关联到全体破产债权人的利益;因此,在破产实践中,应当准确理解共益债务的清偿原则,并对清偿主体、清偿时间、清偿程序等进行规制,才能实现公平目标。
The scientific identification of common benefit debt is related not only to the interests of all creditors, but also to the interests of debtors. Bankruptcy law aims to protect the interests of creditors and debtors equally. Therefore, it is necessary to clarify the scientific connotation of common benefit debt in theory.Although the academic community has formed some consensus on the connotation of common benefit debt, it has two elements: "common benefit" and "in bankruptcy proceedings". However, the academic community's understanding of common benefit debt is very conservative and rigid, resulting in inappropriate "preferential treatment" or "abuse" of related debts in practice. To understand the connotation of common benefit debt, we need to grasp its two basic attributes and two legal characteristics. Two basic attributes, namely "common benefit" and "in bankruptcy proceedings", need to be grasped flexibly. Especially, the essential requirement of"common benefit" should be highlighted. When necessary, considering the essential requirement of "common benefit", we can even expand our understanding of the basic attribute of "in bankruptcy proceedings", that is,the related acts causing debts can occur before the commencement of bankruptcy proceedings. Understanding the connotation of common benefit debt, we can not ignore its two legal characteristics, that is, taking all the property of the debtor as guarantee and paying off at any time. It is precise because the common benefit debt is superior to other ordinary creditor's rights, and it is meaningful to discuss the common benefit debt in theory and try to make a scientific identification of it in practice. Based on defining the connotation of common benefit debt, it is helpful for dealing with common benefit debt correctly in bankruptcy practice to explain the scope of common interest debt theoretically. To grasp the scope of common benefit debt, we should adopt a more scientific way of setting standards for common benefit debt. We can put the standard of common benefit debt into three categories: debts generated by preserving and increasing the value of the debtor's whole assets or specific assets, debts that the law stipulates the debtor should bear, and debts generated for common benefit purposes such as liquidation, reorganization and reconciliation. To identify common benefit debt is an important aspect of constructing the theory of common benefit debt to analyse the types of it theoretically. The classification of common benefit debt can be based on the occurrence of debts as a logical basis, but in legislation, we must overcome such defects as partial generalization. At the same time, the common benefit debt can also be classified according to the criteria of whether the occurrence of the debt depends on the will of creditors or administrators, whether it has labor service content, whether it has security, etc. Whether the common benefit debt can be repaid in time has a great influence on the common benefit creditors, especially the active common benefit creditors, and will also affect the interests of the bankrupt creditors. Therefore, in bankruptcy practice, we should adhere to the principle of legal liquidation and regulate the main body, time and procedure of liquidation.
The scientific identification of common benefit debt is related not only to the interests of all creditors, but also to the interests of debtors. Bankruptcy law aims to protect the interests of creditors and debtors equally. Therefore, it is necessary to clarify the scientific connotation of common benefit debt in theory.Although the academic community has formed some consensus on the connotation of common benefit debt, it has two elements: "common benefit" and "in bankruptcy proceedings". However, the academic community's understanding of common benefit debt is very conservative and rigid, resulting in inappropriate "preferential treatment" or "abuse" of related debts in practice. To understand the connotation of common benefit debt, we need to grasp its two basic attributes and two legal characteristics. Two basic attributes, namely "common benefit" and "in bankruptcy proceedings", need to be grasped flexibly. Especially, the essential requirement of"common benefit" should be highlighted. When necessary, considering the essential requirement of "common benefit", we can even expand our understanding of the basic attribute of "in bankruptcy proceedings", that is,the related acts causing debts can occur before the commencement of bankruptcy proceedings. Understanding the connotation of common benefit debt, we can not ignore its two legal characteristics, that is, taking all the property of the debtor as guarantee and paying off at any time. It is precise because the common benefit debt is superior to other ordinary creditor's rights, and it is meaningful to discuss the common benefit debt in theory and try to make a scientific identification of it in practice. Based on defining the connotation of common benefit debt, it is helpful for dealing with common benefit debt correctly in bankruptcy practice to explain the scope of common interest debt theoretically. To grasp the scope of common benefit debt, we should adopt a more scientific way of setting standards for common benefit debt. We can put the standard of common benefit debt into three categories: debts generated by preserving and increasing the value of the debtor's whole assets or specific assets, debts that the law stipulates the debtor should bear, and debts generated for common benefit purposes such as liquidation, reorganization and reconciliation. To identify common benefit debt is an important aspect of constructing the theory of common benefit debt to analyse the types of it theoretically. The classification of common benefit debt can be based on the occurrence of debts as a logical basis, but in legislation, we must overcome such defects as partial generalization. At the same time, the common benefit debt can also be classified according to the criteria of whether the occurrence of the debt depends on the will of creditors or administrators, whether it has labor service content, whether it has security, etc. Whether the common benefit debt can be repaid in time has a great influence on the common benefit creditors, especially the active common benefit creditors, and will also affect the interests of the bankrupt creditors. Therefore, in bankruptcy practice, we should adhere to the principle of legal liquidation and regulate the main body, time and procedure of liquidation.
引文
[1]陈伟.共益债务的认定——从“绝对程序标准”到“双重标准”[J].南京航空航天大学学报(社会科学版),2017(1):22-26.
[2]王欣新.破产法:第3版[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2011:290.
[3]法律出版社法规中心.中华人民共和国企业破产法注释本[M].北京:法律出版社,2010:28.
[4]付翠英.破解企业破产的10大法律难题[M].北京:中国法制出版社,2008:179.
[5]娄爱华.《破产法》第42条涉不当得利条款解释论[J].社会科学,2013(4):99-106.
[6]罗培新,伍坚.破产法[M].上海:格致出版社,上海人民出版社,2009:135.
[7]乌尔里希·克卢格.法律逻辑[M].雷磊,译.北京:法律出版社,2015:122.
[8]程品方.人民法院企业破产审判实务疑难问题解析[M].北京:法律出版社,2016:53.
[9]唐艳.论共益债务制度——兼评《企业破产法》第42条[D].重庆:西南政法大学,2014.
[10]最高人民法院民事审判第二庭,奚晓明,宋晓明,等.企业改制、破产与重整案件审判指导[M].北京:法律出版社,2015:214.
[11]许德风.破产法论:解释与功能比较的视角[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2015:168.
[12]付翠英.论破产费用和共益债务[J].政治与法律,2010(9):24-32.
[13]李永军.破产法:理论与规范研究[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2013:219.
[14]欧海欧.共益债权应向管理人申报[N].人民法院报,2008-09-04(6).
[15]王欣新.破产法理论与实务疑难问题研究[M].北京:中国法制出版社,2011:286.
[2]王欣新.破产法:第3版[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2011:290.
[3]法律出版社法规中心.中华人民共和国企业破产法注释本[M].北京:法律出版社,2010:28.
[4]付翠英.破解企业破产的10大法律难题[M].北京:中国法制出版社,2008:179.
[5]娄爱华.《破产法》第42条涉不当得利条款解释论[J].社会科学,2013(4):99-106.
[6]罗培新,伍坚.破产法[M].上海:格致出版社,上海人民出版社,2009:135.
[7]乌尔里希·克卢格.法律逻辑[M].雷磊,译.北京:法律出版社,2015:122.
[8]程品方.人民法院企业破产审判实务疑难问题解析[M].北京:法律出版社,2016:53.
[9]唐艳.论共益债务制度——兼评《企业破产法》第42条[D].重庆:西南政法大学,2014.
[10]最高人民法院民事审判第二庭,奚晓明,宋晓明,等.企业改制、破产与重整案件审判指导[M].北京:法律出版社,2015:214.
[11]许德风.破产法论:解释与功能比较的视角[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2015:168.
[12]付翠英.论破产费用和共益债务[J].政治与法律,2010(9):24-32.
[13]李永军.破产法:理论与规范研究[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2013:219.
[14]欧海欧.共益债权应向管理人申报[N].人民法院报,2008-09-04(6).
[15]王欣新.破产法理论与实务疑难问题研究[M].北京:中国法制出版社,2011:286.