间接代理制度在我国的冲突与融合
|
摘要
两大法系基于不同理论基础建立了不同的代理制度,在经济贸易迅速发展的今天,代理制度在各自不同社会文化环境中发挥着重要的作用。我国代理法理论的发展大体存在着两种形式,一是在建国后至我国《合同法》颁布前,我国坚持大陆法系的传统模式,将代理的概念局限在直接代理的范围内；另一种形式则是以《合同法》的颁布为契机,我国开始基于实践中经济发展的需要,引进了英美法系的隐名代理和不公开本人身份的代理,但是这种制度的引进没有和我国原有的代理制度框架相融合,引起了理论界对此强烈的讨论。本文在对两大法系间接代理制度理论和实践发展比较研究的基础上,剖析两种不同的法律传统和文化价值对代理制度的影响,借鉴国际代理法和区域立法上的优秀做法,针对我国间接代理制度存在的冲突,提出完善的对策,以期对我国《民法典》制度过程中对统一代理立法提供有益的探索。
本文的正文主体共分为四个部分。
一、两大法系间接代理制度之冲突。在介绍大陆法系一般理论的基础上,分别选取大陆法系的典型国家法国、德国、日本和瑞士介绍间接代理制度在这些国家的表现。介绍英美法系代理的基础理论,之后详细分析了不公开本人身份的代理和隐名代理两种代理形式。在此基础上采取横向比较的方法,在代理法律设置、法律效果的归属、代理权的产生、价值取向四个方面分析两大法系间接代理存在的差异。
二、间接代理制度在国际立法及区域立法上的融合。介绍国际代理法上的《国际货物销售代理公约》、《国际商事合同通则》、《海牙公约》及欧洲统一立法过程中的《欧洲合同法原则》和《欧洲民法典草案》在两大法系间接代理制度方面融合的表现,分析其利弊,进行有益的借鉴。
三、我国对间接代理制度的移植及面临的理论困境。介绍我国对间接代理制度的移植,以及由此引发的间接代理制度在我国理论上的困境。我国应该立足本土特色,融合两大法系的间接代理制度,采取广义立法的形式,缓和显名主义的拘束。
四、我国间接代理制度在立法上的冲突及完善建议。笔者从间接代理制度我国现行立法《民法通则》及《合同法》上的冲突入手,提出相应的完善建议以及设想未来《民法典》中间接代理制度的设置。
本文采取比较分析、理论联系实际的方法,从理论及实证两方面分析两大法系间接代理制度在我国的冲突,借鉴国际立法及欧盟立法的优秀做法,最后提出为了适应我国经济生活发展的需要,更加真实的反映经济生活中的代理现状,我国在代理的概念上应当适当扩大代理的含义,缓和显名主义的僵化,将我国直接代理和间接代理的形式都在代理的含义中有所体现,使得我国民商合一的立法模式下,《民法典》中既能反映民事代理,也能涵盖商事代理的范围。当今《合同法》的发展,合同的相对性原则的突破,合同关系由传统的双方关系逐渐演变成多方关系,因此在保持大陆法系行纪制度独立性的同时,在委托人和第三人之间建立直接的法律关系,完善委托人的介入权和第三人的选择权,满足当事人意思自治的需要,增加代理人的披露义务,满足经济迅速发展的需要。在未来《民法典》的设置上,按照大陆法系总则分则的设置方法,在总则中使代理独立成章,规定代理的一般规则、直接代理和间接代理三节,统一我国的代理立法。对于特别的代理形式采取特别规范的形式另行制定单行法进行具体的规定。
Two legal systems based on different theoretical basis establish two different agent systems. Today, as the rapid development in economy and trade, agent systems in their different social and culture environments play an important role. In general, China's development of the agency theory law who are two forms, one is after China found before the published of contract law, civil law in China stick to the traditional model, the concept of agency is limited within the direct agency; the other is based on contract law enacted as an opportunity, China began to meet the need of economic development, introduced the common law of unnamed agency and undisclosed agency, but they don't coordinate with our existing system and framework of agent, led theorists to discuss this strongly. In this paper, by means of theory and practice of indirect agent system development based on the comparative study, analysis of two different legal traditions and cultural values impact on the agent system, draw on international and regional legislation on the law of agency, put forward a perfect strategies in order to solve the question in China's indirect agent system, provide an useful exploration to "Civil Code" system.
The main body of this article is divided into four parts.
One, Conflict between two legal indirect agencies. Introduce the general theory of civil law, select in France, Germany, Japan and Switzerland to introduce their indirect agency. Analysis unnamed agency and undisclosed agency of common law agency. On the basis of the method to compare with the law in the proxy settings, the legal effect of vesting, agency production, values of different two legal systems exist in indirect agent.
Two, Indirect agencies in the international legislation and the integration of regional legislation. Introduce the "Convention on Agency in the International Sale of Goods," "International Commercial Contracts", " The Hague Convention on Agency" and " Principles of European Contract Law" and the "Draft Common Frame of Reference," Analysis the performance of two legal systems indirect agent system of integration and the performance of its advantages and disadvantages.
Three, Transplanting and theory dilemma on China's system of indirect agency. From transplanting of China's system of indirect agent, analysis of theoretical difficulties in indirect agency in China.
Four, The confliction with legislation and improvement in China's indirect agent. Conflict with legislation on" Civil Law" and "Contract Law", perfect legislation on "Contract Law", set the agency of the "Civil Code".
This paper adopts comparative analysis of theory and practice of two legal systems'indirect agency.Draw on international and regional best practices. Finally, in order to meet the needs of China's economic development and reflect of the economic life of the agent, the concept of our country in the agency should appropriately expand the meaning of agency, let it cover direct and indirect agents. As "Contract Law" development, the principle of relativity of contracts break through from the contractual into a multi-party relations, so the system while maintain the broker's independence, appropriately establish a direct legal relationship between the principal and third, improve the client's involvement and the third person the right to choose. In the "Civil Code" set, set up direct and indirect agent three proxy, so as to let legislation uniform in China. Take the form of a special agent in the particular form.
本文的正文主体共分为四个部分。
一、两大法系间接代理制度之冲突。在介绍大陆法系一般理论的基础上,分别选取大陆法系的典型国家法国、德国、日本和瑞士介绍间接代理制度在这些国家的表现。介绍英美法系代理的基础理论,之后详细分析了不公开本人身份的代理和隐名代理两种代理形式。在此基础上采取横向比较的方法,在代理法律设置、法律效果的归属、代理权的产生、价值取向四个方面分析两大法系间接代理存在的差异。
二、间接代理制度在国际立法及区域立法上的融合。介绍国际代理法上的《国际货物销售代理公约》、《国际商事合同通则》、《海牙公约》及欧洲统一立法过程中的《欧洲合同法原则》和《欧洲民法典草案》在两大法系间接代理制度方面融合的表现,分析其利弊,进行有益的借鉴。
三、我国对间接代理制度的移植及面临的理论困境。介绍我国对间接代理制度的移植,以及由此引发的间接代理制度在我国理论上的困境。我国应该立足本土特色,融合两大法系的间接代理制度,采取广义立法的形式,缓和显名主义的拘束。
四、我国间接代理制度在立法上的冲突及完善建议。笔者从间接代理制度我国现行立法《民法通则》及《合同法》上的冲突入手,提出相应的完善建议以及设想未来《民法典》中间接代理制度的设置。
本文采取比较分析、理论联系实际的方法,从理论及实证两方面分析两大法系间接代理制度在我国的冲突,借鉴国际立法及欧盟立法的优秀做法,最后提出为了适应我国经济生活发展的需要,更加真实的反映经济生活中的代理现状,我国在代理的概念上应当适当扩大代理的含义,缓和显名主义的僵化,将我国直接代理和间接代理的形式都在代理的含义中有所体现,使得我国民商合一的立法模式下,《民法典》中既能反映民事代理,也能涵盖商事代理的范围。当今《合同法》的发展,合同的相对性原则的突破,合同关系由传统的双方关系逐渐演变成多方关系,因此在保持大陆法系行纪制度独立性的同时,在委托人和第三人之间建立直接的法律关系,完善委托人的介入权和第三人的选择权,满足当事人意思自治的需要,增加代理人的披露义务,满足经济迅速发展的需要。在未来《民法典》的设置上,按照大陆法系总则分则的设置方法,在总则中使代理独立成章,规定代理的一般规则、直接代理和间接代理三节,统一我国的代理立法。对于特别的代理形式采取特别规范的形式另行制定单行法进行具体的规定。
Two legal systems based on different theoretical basis establish two different agent systems. Today, as the rapid development in economy and trade, agent systems in their different social and culture environments play an important role. In general, China's development of the agency theory law who are two forms, one is after China found before the published of contract law, civil law in China stick to the traditional model, the concept of agency is limited within the direct agency; the other is based on contract law enacted as an opportunity, China began to meet the need of economic development, introduced the common law of unnamed agency and undisclosed agency, but they don't coordinate with our existing system and framework of agent, led theorists to discuss this strongly. In this paper, by means of theory and practice of indirect agent system development based on the comparative study, analysis of two different legal traditions and cultural values impact on the agent system, draw on international and regional legislation on the law of agency, put forward a perfect strategies in order to solve the question in China's indirect agent system, provide an useful exploration to "Civil Code" system.
The main body of this article is divided into four parts.
One, Conflict between two legal indirect agencies. Introduce the general theory of civil law, select in France, Germany, Japan and Switzerland to introduce their indirect agency. Analysis unnamed agency and undisclosed agency of common law agency. On the basis of the method to compare with the law in the proxy settings, the legal effect of vesting, agency production, values of different two legal systems exist in indirect agent.
Two, Indirect agencies in the international legislation and the integration of regional legislation. Introduce the "Convention on Agency in the International Sale of Goods," "International Commercial Contracts", " The Hague Convention on Agency" and " Principles of European Contract Law" and the "Draft Common Frame of Reference," Analysis the performance of two legal systems indirect agent system of integration and the performance of its advantages and disadvantages.
Three, Transplanting and theory dilemma on China's system of indirect agency. From transplanting of China's system of indirect agent, analysis of theoretical difficulties in indirect agency in China.
Four, The confliction with legislation and improvement in China's indirect agent. Conflict with legislation on" Civil Law" and "Contract Law", perfect legislation on "Contract Law", set the agency of the "Civil Code".
This paper adopts comparative analysis of theory and practice of two legal systems'indirect agency.Draw on international and regional best practices. Finally, in order to meet the needs of China's economic development and reflect of the economic life of the agent, the concept of our country in the agency should appropriately expand the meaning of agency, let it cover direct and indirect agents. As "Contract Law" development, the principle of relativity of contracts break through from the contractual into a multi-party relations, so the system while maintain the broker's independence, appropriately establish a direct legal relationship between the principal and third, improve the client's involvement and the third person the right to choose. In the "Civil Code" set, set up direct and indirect agent three proxy, so as to let legislation uniform in China. Take the form of a special agent in the particular form.
引文
① Ewoud Hondius. European Private Law-Survey 2000-2002, European Review of Private Law. Vol.10,2002,p865-866.转引自付俊伟.民商法论丛(第43卷)[M].北京：法律出版社,2009.6.
① Walter van Gerven,The ECJ Case-law as a Means of Unification of Private Law?Arthur Hartkamp,Martijn Hesselink, Ewoud Hondius,Carla Joustra,Edgar du Perron,Muriel Veldman,Towards a European Civil Code,2004,Kluwer Law International,pp.101-125.转引自付俊伟.民商法论丛(第43卷)[Ml.北京：法律出版社,2009.6.
②《委员会致欧洲议会和欧盟理事会通信：进一步协调欧洲合同法的行动计划》(Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council:A more coherent European Contract Law.An Action Plan, COM(2003)68 final.)。转引自张彤.欧洲合同法最新发展之探析[J].比较法研究,2009,(2)：89-97.
③由意大利都灵大学法学院教授和德国明斯特大学法学院教授共同组织的,由十余个国家三十多所大学的54位学者构成的研究团体所起草。转引自费安玲.论欧洲一体化进程中欧洲债法趋同之罗马法基础[J].比较法研究,2008,(1)：25-37.
①王卫国主译.荷兰民法典[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,2006.30.
[1]梁慧星.民法总论(第三版)[M].北京：法律出版社,2007.200.
[2]施米托夫.国际贸易法文选[M].北京：中国大百科全书出版社,1993.397.
[3]高富平.代理概念比较研究[J].比较法研究,1997,(2)：76.
[4][德]迪特尔·梅迪库斯著.德国民法总论[M].邵建东译.北京：法律出版社,2001.671.
[5]徐海燕.英美代理法研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2000.360.
[6]王泽鉴.民法总则[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,2001.446.
[7][德]卡尔·拉伦茨著.德国民法通论(下册)[M].王晓晔等译.北京：法律出版社,2003.
[8]罗洁珍译.法国民法典[M].北京：中国法制出版社,1999.456.
[9]徐海燕.从两大法系间接代理制度的融合趋势谈我国代理立法的完善(上)[0L].民商法律网,[2004-12-06][2009-09-15].
[10][德]拉尔·拉伦茨.德国民法通论[M].王晓晔等译.北京：法律出版社,2003.821.
[11]杜景林,卢谌译.德国民法典[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,2000.183.
[12]杜颖.解读中华人民共和国合同法402条和403条[J].中外法学,2007,(6)：757-766.
[13]渠涛编译,最新日本民法[M].北京：法律出版社,2006.26.
[14]王书江,殷建平译.日本商法[M].北京：中国法制出版社,1994.122.
[15]郑玉波.民法总则(修订九版)[M].台北：三民书局,313.
[16]G·H·LFridman. The Law of Agency(7th edition), London:Buttorworth,1996. p.9.
[17]王利明.论间接代理[C].民商法研究(第五辑),北京：法律出版社,2001.87.
[18]G·H·LFridman.The Law of Agency(7th edition).London:Butterworths,1990, p230-235.
[19]董安生等编译.英国商法[M].北京：法律出版社,1991.204.
[20]覃明娜,顾晔.间接代理制度研究[J].湖北省社会主义学院学报,2002,(3)：63-64.
[21]张蹇.合同法中间接代理制度评析[J].广播电视大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2002,(3)：82-84.
[22]F.M.B. Reynolds, Bo stead on agency, fifteenth edition, Sweet & Maxwell, London,1985,p.424转引自徐海燕.英美代理法研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2000.266.
[23]徐海燕.从两大法系间接代理制度融合的趋势谈我国代理立法的完善[C].国际商法论丛(第5卷),北京：法律出版社,2003.438.
[24]费安玲.论欧洲一体化进程中欧洲债法趋同之罗马法基础[J].比较法研究,2008,(1)：25-27.
[25][德]海因·克茨.欧洲合同法(上卷)[M].周忠海等译,北京：法律出版社,2001.313-353.
[26]《欧洲合同法及对现有袄的修正：下一步的道路》.转引自张彤.欧洲合同法最新发展之探析[J].比较法研究,2009,(2)：89-97.
[27]袁合川.合同相对性原则及其突破间关系之法理分析[J].行政与法,2004,(3)：112-113.
[28]王利明.论合同的相对性[J],中国法学,1996,(4)：63-73.
[29]陈徐奉.论商事代理[J].河北法学,2009,(7)：116-121.
[30]郑自文著.国际代理法研究[M].北京：法律出版社,1998.3.
[31]沈四宝,汪渊智.我国外贸代理制度的法律冲突及其消解[OL].民商法律网,[2008-11-13][2009-09-15].
[32]陈运雄.我国商事代理的理论基础及其相关规则的完善——基于比较法的考察[J].法学研究,2006,(6)：207-208,209-210.
[33]穆昌亮.合同相对性原则邹议.贵州大学学报(社会科学版)[J].2003,(21)：76-79.
[34]崔建远.合同法(第四版)[M].北京：法律出版社,2007.499.
[35]陈忠禹.论间接代理——简评《合同法》第402、403条[J].石河子大学学报(哲社版),2008,22(4)：24-26.
[36]梁慧星.民法总论[M.北京：法律出版社,2001.234.
[37]何美欢.香港代理法(上)[M].北京：北京大学出版社,1996.262.
[38]梁慧星.中国民法典草案建议稿附理由[M].北京：法律出版社,2004.304-306.
[39]王利明.中国民法典学者建议稿及立法理由总则编[M].北京：法律出版社,2005.332-334.
[40]江帆.代理法律制度研究[M].北京：中国法制出版社,2002.28.
[41]刘宏华.从外贸代理制看民事代理制度若干问题[J].现代法学,1997,(5)：42-46.
① Walter van Gerven,The ECJ Case-law as a Means of Unification of Private Law?Arthur Hartkamp,Martijn Hesselink, Ewoud Hondius,Carla Joustra,Edgar du Perron,Muriel Veldman,Towards a European Civil Code,2004,Kluwer Law International,pp.101-125.转引自付俊伟.民商法论丛(第43卷)[Ml.北京：法律出版社,2009.6.
②《委员会致欧洲议会和欧盟理事会通信：进一步协调欧洲合同法的行动计划》(Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council:A more coherent European Contract Law.An Action Plan, COM(2003)68 final.)。转引自张彤.欧洲合同法最新发展之探析[J].比较法研究,2009,(2)：89-97.
③由意大利都灵大学法学院教授和德国明斯特大学法学院教授共同组织的,由十余个国家三十多所大学的54位学者构成的研究团体所起草。转引自费安玲.论欧洲一体化进程中欧洲债法趋同之罗马法基础[J].比较法研究,2008,(1)：25-37.
①王卫国主译.荷兰民法典[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,2006.30.
[1]梁慧星.民法总论(第三版)[M].北京：法律出版社,2007.200.
[2]施米托夫.国际贸易法文选[M].北京：中国大百科全书出版社,1993.397.
[3]高富平.代理概念比较研究[J].比较法研究,1997,(2)：76.
[4][德]迪特尔·梅迪库斯著.德国民法总论[M].邵建东译.北京：法律出版社,2001.671.
[5]徐海燕.英美代理法研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2000.360.
[6]王泽鉴.民法总则[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,2001.446.
[7][德]卡尔·拉伦茨著.德国民法通论(下册)[M].王晓晔等译.北京：法律出版社,2003.
[8]罗洁珍译.法国民法典[M].北京：中国法制出版社,1999.456.
[9]徐海燕.从两大法系间接代理制度的融合趋势谈我国代理立法的完善(上)[0L].民商法律网,[2004-12-06][2009-09-15].
[10][德]拉尔·拉伦茨.德国民法通论[M].王晓晔等译.北京：法律出版社,2003.821.
[11]杜景林,卢谌译.德国民法典[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,2000.183.
[12]杜颖.解读中华人民共和国合同法402条和403条[J].中外法学,2007,(6)：757-766.
[13]渠涛编译,最新日本民法[M].北京：法律出版社,2006.26.
[14]王书江,殷建平译.日本商法[M].北京：中国法制出版社,1994.122.
[15]郑玉波.民法总则(修订九版)[M].台北：三民书局,313.
[16]G·H·LFridman. The Law of Agency(7th edition), London:Buttorworth,1996. p.9.
[17]王利明.论间接代理[C].民商法研究(第五辑),北京：法律出版社,2001.87.
[18]G·H·LFridman.The Law of Agency(7th edition).London:Butterworths,1990, p230-235.
[19]董安生等编译.英国商法[M].北京：法律出版社,1991.204.
[20]覃明娜,顾晔.间接代理制度研究[J].湖北省社会主义学院学报,2002,(3)：63-64.
[21]张蹇.合同法中间接代理制度评析[J].广播电视大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2002,(3)：82-84.
[22]F.M.B. Reynolds, Bo stead on agency, fifteenth edition, Sweet & Maxwell, London,1985,p.424转引自徐海燕.英美代理法研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2000.266.
[23]徐海燕.从两大法系间接代理制度融合的趋势谈我国代理立法的完善[C].国际商法论丛(第5卷),北京：法律出版社,2003.438.
[24]费安玲.论欧洲一体化进程中欧洲债法趋同之罗马法基础[J].比较法研究,2008,(1)：25-27.
[25][德]海因·克茨.欧洲合同法(上卷)[M].周忠海等译,北京：法律出版社,2001.313-353.
[26]《欧洲合同法及对现有袄的修正：下一步的道路》.转引自张彤.欧洲合同法最新发展之探析[J].比较法研究,2009,(2)：89-97.
[27]袁合川.合同相对性原则及其突破间关系之法理分析[J].行政与法,2004,(3)：112-113.
[28]王利明.论合同的相对性[J],中国法学,1996,(4)：63-73.
[29]陈徐奉.论商事代理[J].河北法学,2009,(7)：116-121.
[30]郑自文著.国际代理法研究[M].北京：法律出版社,1998.3.
[31]沈四宝,汪渊智.我国外贸代理制度的法律冲突及其消解[OL].民商法律网,[2008-11-13][2009-09-15].
[32]陈运雄.我国商事代理的理论基础及其相关规则的完善——基于比较法的考察[J].法学研究,2006,(6)：207-208,209-210.
[33]穆昌亮.合同相对性原则邹议.贵州大学学报(社会科学版)[J].2003,(21)：76-79.
[34]崔建远.合同法(第四版)[M].北京：法律出版社,2007.499.
[35]陈忠禹.论间接代理——简评《合同法》第402、403条[J].石河子大学学报(哲社版),2008,22(4)：24-26.
[36]梁慧星.民法总论[M.北京：法律出版社,2001.234.
[37]何美欢.香港代理法(上)[M].北京：北京大学出版社,1996.262.
[38]梁慧星.中国民法典草案建议稿附理由[M].北京：法律出版社,2004.304-306.
[39]王利明.中国民法典学者建议稿及立法理由总则编[M].北京：法律出版社,2005.332-334.
[40]江帆.代理法律制度研究[M].北京：中国法制出版社,2002.28.
[41]刘宏华.从外贸代理制看民事代理制度若干问题[J].现代法学,1997,(5)：42-46.