重大误解解释论纲

发布时间：2018-08-19 18:18

【摘要】：民法总则》第147条虽具有完全性法条的外形,因"重大误解"一词本身为不确定概念,故含有授权补充的漏洞。适用该法条,应将评价因素具体化。法律行为已成立乃是当然的前提,误解的重大性只是必要但不充分的条件,此外,还应补充相对人对于误解的参与以及消极要件。通过类比第三人欺诈场合的立法价值判断,并参考比较法,上述要点理应吸收进入第147条的解释论。重大误解固然可以发生撤销权,有些场合变更合同更符合实际需要。考虑相对人对于误解方误解的参与因素,损害赔偿一般不是误解方赔偿相对方,而是相对方赔偿误解方;此种赔偿是对于信赖利益的赔偿。关于重大误解的解释论,应实现从二元论向一元论、从意思主义向表示主义的理论转型。
[Abstract]:Although Article 147 of Civil Law has the form of complete law, because the term "significant misunderstanding" itself is an uncertain concept, it contains loopholes in the supplement of authorization. To apply the article, the evaluation factors should be specified. The legal act has been established as a prerequisite of course, and the importance of misunderstanding is only a necessary but insufficient condition. In addition, the participation of the counterpart in the misunderstanding and the negative elements should be supplemented. By analogy to the legislative value of third party fraud and referring to comparative law, the above points should be absorbed into the explanatory theory of article 147. Major misunderstandings can occur, but in some cases the contract is more in line with the actual needs. Considering the factors involved in the misunderstanding of the misunderstanding party, the compensation for damages is generally not the misunderstanding party, but the opposite party compensation for the misunderstanding party; this kind of compensation is the compensation for the trust interest. The theory of interpretation of major misunderstandings should be transformed from dualism to monism and from idealism to expressionism.
【作者单位】：清华大学法学院;
【基金】：2014年度国家社会科学基金重大项目:“中国民法重述、民法典编纂与社会主义市场经济法律制度的完善”(142DC018)的阶段性研究成果之一
【分类号】：D923.1

【相似文献】