【作者】 刘晓华；

【导师】 刘保玉；

【作者基本信息】 山东大学 ， 民商法学， 2013， 博士

【摘要】 保护信赖是建立社会秩序的前提与基础,信赖保护原则是构筑私法体系的重要理论支撑。随着经济的快速发展,简便、快捷的交易给主体带来越来越多的经济利益,同时也产生了交易欺诈、隐瞒等不安全因素,为了提高交易的成功率,也为了保护更大范围内主体的经济利益,避免在确定交易的可靠性、可行性上耗费过多的精力,从而阻碍交易的进行,法律需要对交易安全进行优先考量,这就是对信赖进行保护的必要性之所在。为了促进交易的达成,应当保护相对人的信赖,并由信赖保护原则来指导立法与司法,规范交易主体的行为。现代私法是以“私法自治”为核心而展开的,而“私法自治”又与“法律行为”概念密不可分,“法律行为”是实现“私法自治”的必要手段,以“法律行为”为基础衍生出私法的诸多理论。论文以私法中的基本法律概念“法律行为”为标准,以与其相对照的“具有法律上相关性的行为”为依据,构建信赖保护制度的基本框架,通过剖析“法律行为”与“具有法律上相关性的行为”二者的关系,分析法律行为责任与信赖责任在私法体系中的定位,并在此基础上提出信赖保护原则与私法自治原则的分野是制度分歧的必然,因此信赖保护原则应当成为一个独立的私法基本原则。论文以“具有法律上相关性的行为”为基本支撑,以比较方法、法律的经济分析、规范分析与实证分析相结合等方法研究信赖保护原则的基本原理、制度构成和法律效果,力求总结归纳普遍性适用规则,为信赖保护原则作为独立的私法原则进行理论铺垫,并对其在私法体系中的构造进行初步的梳理,在对积极信赖保护与消极信赖保护进行类型化研究的基础上整合我国私法体系中体现信赖保护原则的具体制度。全文除导论外,共分为六章。第一章从信赖与信赖保护着手,研究对信赖进行保护的必要性和重要性,对信赖、信赖保护、信赖责任和信赖保护原则等基本研究范畴进行了界定,是论文全文研究的逻辑起点。私法上的信赖是一个具有社会伦理性的概念,人与人之间只有存在基本的信赖,社会生活才能处于维持一般秩序所必需的最基础的稳定之中。保护这种信赖可以使个体获得基本的安全感,逐步扩大人与人之间的合作,节约社会活动的成本,建立起比较稳固的社会关系。脱离这种信赖,社会关系无法得到确认和保护,人际交往的成本可能会无限扩大,法律关系极不确定,整个社会就会出现无序状态。从法学研究的角度来看,信赖要解决的不仅是内心相信,更重要的是因为这种主观心理的确信,当事人实施了相应的行为,而这种行为又改变了当事人的法律地位,或者说因为“信”而产生了相应的法律后果,法律如果要对此种后果进行规制,就涉及怎样进行制度设计与安排,如何及怎样来保护因信赖而改变法律地位的人的利益。这才是法律上的信赖所应当关注的焦点。因此,私法上的信赖是主观要素与客观要素的统一。信赖保护原则之所以能够有效地发挥其对普遍的信赖进行规制的功能,在相当大的程度上取决于其自身丰富的内涵,并且由于这一丰富的内涵使其具备了与相关制度的融洽性并能协作适用。信赖保护各种具体法律制度基于相同或基本相同的对于信赖进行必要保护的共同追求,形成了产生一个独立于其他法律原则的全新原则的可能性。第二章从两大法系有关信赖保护的重要制度权利外观理论和禁反言理论进行比较研究,从其历史渊源和发展轨迹对两种制度分别进行了解读。大陆法系选择权利外观理论作为信赖保护的重要制度,为了保护交易安全,法律将外化的法律地位优先于内部法律关系进行保护,即赋予外观优越于真实的法律地位,这是经济发展到二十世纪初社会关系的真实反映,也是法律对社会关系调整的必然趋势。权利外观理论的发展既有法律发展史上的渊源,又与社会经济发展的变化趋势息息相关,从罗马法上的Gerewe起源,类推扩充至公示思想,经过与因主义、意思表示理论等思想的渗透与修正,逐渐丰富与扩展,形成了逻辑严密、思想丰富的完整理论体系,是研究信赖保护问题不可或缺的一环,对司法实践问题的解决也起到重要的指导作用。英美法上的禁反言肇始于证据法上的排除性规则,其后由于适用时往往产生实体法规则的效力进而在实体法上开始适用,其实体法规则完善于表示禁反言,衡平法上提出允诺禁反言后进入理论研究与实践适用的兴盛时代。虽然二者在历史起源、目的作用、法律思想等方面都有很大的差异,但它们在制度设计、适用范围、法律功能等方面惊人的一致性也为二者的融合和相互借鉴提供了必要的前提。第三章提出信赖保护原则在私法中的重要地位,即应当成为私法中独立的法律原则。私法自治原则下,对财产的静的保护即对权利主体既得利益的保护优先考虑。而信赖保护原则却保护第三人对由真正权利人或本人造成的表见事实的信赖,从而实现对交易安全的优先保护。信赖保护原则所涵盖的法律制度都体现了对交易安全的特别关注,将保护交易安全这一价值选择再现到具体法律规范中。民事主体法、代理法、物权法、债法、婚姻家庭法以及公司法、票据法等商法规范中都有信赖保护原则的具体表现。信赖保护原则反映了市场经济条件下对交易安全的保护,符合市场经济的一般要求,也体现了立法者在私法领域所奉行的政策,即对交易安全的保护表明立法政策从主要保护财产“静”的安全转向也保护“动”的安全,迎合了交易效益的要求,也符合公平、正义的价值追求。从民法基本原则的功能来看,在具体法律规范无法裁判案件时,信赖保护原则可以成为法律解释的依据,因此,信赖保护原则具备了内容的根本性和适用的普遍性,是制定诸多民法制度与民法规范的理论基础和正当来源,应当成为独立的私法原则。第四章对信赖保护原则为什么可以独立于私法自治原则与诚实信用原则进行了进一步的论述。通过对信赖保护原则的基础——“具有法律上相关性的行为”的界定,进一步分析了为什么信赖保护原则要与私法自治原则分立,从而成为私法上的独立原则。信赖保护是以“具有法律上相关性的行为”这一概念为基础的,即信赖保护的具体法律制度是构建在这一概念的基础上。“具有法律上相关性的行为”与“法律行为”相对,是指与行为人的意思表示无关,其法律效果由法律直接规定。即“具有法律上相关性的行为”不属于设权行为,它本身不构成规则,而是法律秩序基于法律上的评价而直接规定的法律效果。它与法律行为的根本分别即在于此,法律行为的本质属性是设立、变更或消灭法律关系,其之所以发生法律效果是因为行为人希望发生这一效果,法律效果是行为人意思表示的结果,而“具有法律上相关性的行为”的法律效果是由法律直接规定的。因此,“法律行为”所产生的法律责任与“具有法律上相关性的行为”而产生的责任即信赖责任在本质属性上也截然不同。在此基础上,信赖保护原则与私法自治原则也是相对应的,是在“具有法律上相关性的行为”基础上的统领相关制度的独立的私法原则。信赖保护主要是一种旨在提高法律行为交易稳定性的法律技术性手段,信赖保护原则没有法律伦理方面的要求。信赖保护原则与诚实信用原则在基本内涵、价值追求、适用逻辑、基础理念等诸多方面均有区别。信赖保护主要是为了对因合理信赖对方而造成损失的信赖人予以保护,以维护交易安全；它在民法体系中有明确而具体的制度表现,如表见代理、善意取得等制度,在适用时有具体的构成要件和法律后果；它的制度支持与“法律行为”相对,有自身独有的适用范围,主要是由“具有法律上相关性的行为”造成的信赖。诚实信用原则要求民事活动的主体恪守诺言、讲究信用,具有强烈的道德色彩；它主要的适用还是在合同领域,与法律行为概念密切相关,其调整方式有很大的局限性；它在适用时缺少具体的内容,需要根据个案的不同情况发掘其自身的适用标准,总体上是一个非常抽象的原则。因此,信赖保护原则有诚实信用原则所不能达到的独立范围与有效的调整方式,应当独立于诚实信用原则。第五章以积极的信赖保护——权利外观责任为例,对信赖保护的具体制度构造进行了较为深入的探讨：即对外观的存在,真正权利人可归责性的考量,信赖人的善意、合理信赖以及信赖投入等要件从理论到实务进行了逐一探讨。外观事实的存在是对外观进行保护的基本要件,所谓外观是与法律真实相背离的外化的事实,其外在表征可以是主体资格如表见合伙、表见商人、表见成年等等；也可以是行为,如债权的表见让与、占有等等。关于真正权利人的要求,即他的行为造成了外观事实的形成,也可以说他对外观的形成具有可归责性。关于可归责性的判断标准有不同的观点,卡纳里斯认为应优先适用风险原则。因为更为重要的不是信赖人因为引致人作出了某种表示,而是这种表示是否导致信赖人加大了对其表示的信赖之风险。笔者认为,权利外观责任的形成是多个要件共同作用的结果,不能仅从引致信赖的一方寻找原因甚至依据其有无过错直接得出结论,因为还要有信赖人的信赖及为一定行为等要素综合作用才能对外观进行确定的保护。因此在引致人的可归责性这一要件上,应当区别案件情况综合考虑,可以借鉴卡纳里斯的观点,无论是积极行为还是不作为都要考量引致人所导致的外观是否加大了信赖人依据外观事实而行事的风险。第六章致力于对信赖保护原则及其指导下具体制度的构建进行探讨。首先要确立信赖保护原则在私法中独立的地位,在民法典中对其进行适当地设计；二是从积极的信赖保护和消极的信赖保护两大分类体系对我国信赖保护的相关制度进行整体地梳理,对本身存在但不够完善的制度进行完善,并对缺失的信赖保护类型进行了填补。积极的信赖保护包括民事主体中表见成年、善意取得、表见代理、债权的表见让与等制度；消极的信赖保护包括错误意思表示的撤销、无权代理、缔约过失等具体制度。信赖保护体系应当保持开放性的特征,以上述制度为典型但又不局限于上述制度,逐步将符合信赖构成要件的诸多制度一一吸纳,从而更好地发挥其作用。更多还原

【Abstract】 Reliance protection is the premise and foundation to set up social order.Reliance protection principle is the social ethical element in constructing the private law system. With rapid development of economy, simple and convenient business trade creates increasing economic benefits to the commercial subjects while insecurity factors such as trading fraud and concealment emerge. In order to enhance the success of transaction and avoid too much cost relating to the determination of transaction reliability and feasibility, there is a requirement that trade security need to come to top one priority in terms of law. It is the necessity that reliance should be protected. For the sake of promoting the success ratio of transaction, reliance should be protected. The legislation and judicature should be guided by reliance protection principle.Modern civil law is on the base of Privatautonomie, yet Privatautonomie has a relationship with the concept of legal act which is the necessary means that Privatautonomie can be realized. The basic legal concepts of legal act and the act relating to law is the foundation of the paper. By analyzing the relationship between legal act and the act relating to law and discussing the orientation in private law system from legal behavior responsibility to Vertrauenshaftung, the conclusion is that reliance protection principle should be an independent basic private law principle with the deviation from private autonomy principle. This paper studies the basic principle of reliance protection principle, system constitution and the legal effect in order to summarize general applicable rules and establish the theoretical foundation for reliance protection principle as an independent principle of private law. Furthermore, the paper attempts to rebuild the system structure of positive reliance protection and negative reliance protection in Chinese private law system.Full text except the introduction is divided into six chapters.Chapter OneThis chapter studies the necessity and significance of reliance and reliance protection on the basis of definition of those fundamental research categories such as reliance, reliance protection, Vertrauenshaftung, reliance protection principle. Reliance in private law perspective is a concept which has a social ethical connotation because the existing social life can under control in terms of such general order. Protecting such kind of reliance can give the individual essential sense of security, expand the cooperation between people, save the cost of social activities and establish relatively stable social relation. Without reliance, the cost of interpersonal communication could be enlarged unlimitedly; meanwhile the legal relation may lead to great uncertainty. From the perspective of jurisprudence, the top priority is not only to figure out the faith in heart, but to act on the reliance which naturally changes the legal status of the parties. For regulating those kinds of consequences in law, there is an imperious requirement which is about how to carry on the system design and arrangement, simultaneously how to protect the legal status of the parties. Consequently, reliance is integrated from the subjective factors to objective factors. The function of reliance protection principle depends on its own rich connotation. The various of specific system in terms of reliance protection that is based on the common pursuit of value for protecting reliance leads to the possibility in which the new principle is independent of other legal principles.Chapter TwoThe main purpose of this chapter is the comparative study between Rechtsschein theory and estoppel theory by analyzing historical origin and developing pattern of two systems respectively. The Civil Law system selects Rechtsschein theory as a significant system for reliance protection for the sake of protecting transaction security where external legal relation is superior to the real legal status. It is a reflection of social relationships with the economic development of the20th century and also an inevitable trend for regulating social relations in law. The development of Rechtsschein theories is relevant to the origin of law history, the change of social development and economic enhancement. It originates from Gerewe of Roman law. By expanding application of the publicity idea, it has been permeated and revised by Zutun and theories on declaration of will etc. Estoppel theory in Common Law initiates from rule of exclusion in evidence law and then is to be applied in substantive law. Although there is prodigious discrepancy in terms of historical origin, purpose, function, legal thought and so forth, astonishing consistency with regard to system design, the applicable scope and legal function of them also provides the necessary premise of their intergradation.Chapter ThreeAs reliance protection principle plays a significant role in terms of private law system, it is independent legal principle in private law. Under the principle of private autonomy, the law focuses on the protection of the vested interests which is the top one priority. The purpose of reliance protection principle is to protect the third party who has faith on both real rights holder and ostensible facts caused by the other party. Legal systems with reliance protection principle pay special attention to transaction security such as civil subject law, law of agency, property law, law of obligation, marriage and family law, corporation law, law of negotiable instrument and so on and so forth. Reliance protection principle reflects not only the requirements of protecting transaction security but also the policy in the field of private law. The change of law policy is satisfied with the pursuit of justice and just. From the perspective of functional civil law basic principle, in the specific scenario, reliance protection principle can be the basis of legal interpretation. Reliance protection principle should be an independent principle of private law considering its significance of contents and wide application.Chapter FourThe independence of the reliance protection principle is discussed in this paper. By the definition of act with legal relevance, this chapter analyzes the topic why reliance protection principle and the principle of private autonomy is different. Reliance protection is based on the concept of act with legal relevance. Act with legal relevance is opposite to the concept of legal act, namely there is nothing about party’s declaration of intention, and its legal effect shall be prescribed by law directly. Moreover, it does not belong to legal act as it does not constitute a rule itself. It is legal effect which is based on the evaluation of law. The most fundamental discrepancy between act with legal relevance and legal act is that the essential attribute of legal act is establishment, modification or elimination of legal relationship. The reason why it takes legal effects results from the party who wants to get such effect, yet the legal effect of act with legal relevance is stated by law immediately. Consequently, there is a fundamental discrepancy in terms of legal liability between legal act and act with legal relevance, namely Vertrauenshaftung. On this basis, reliance protection principle is opposite to private autonomy, which is an independent principle in private law. Reliance protection is primarily a legally technical method, which aims at improving the stability of the transaction; meanwhile it has no legal ethics requirements. Reliance protection principles and the good faith principle are different in many aspects such as the basic meaning, values, scope, applicable requirements etc. Reliance protection is the product of legal technology in order to maintain transaction security; it has a clear and specific system performance in private law system. Its institutional support is controversial to the legal act and it has its own unique scope. Good faith principle requires the subject of civil activities to keep his promise, pay attention to credit with a strong moral tone. It is originally applicable to private autonomy area such as the performance of contract. It is closely related to the concept of legal act and its adjustment method has great limitations, which is very abstract. The reliance protection principle has the independent scope and effective way, which cannot be achieved by the good faith principle. Therefore it should be independent of the good faith principle.Chapter FiveThis chapter discusses the system structure of reliance protection. The requirements of reliance protection are the presence of appearance, real right holder’s imputability considerations, the good faith of the party, reasonable reliance, reliance investment and other elements. Exterior appearance is the basic element for its protection; meanwhile the appearance shows the external fact of its departure from the legal reality. Real rights holders is the party whose act causes the appearance of the formation of the facts, and it can be said that he is imputable for the appearance. Regarding the criteria for determining imputability, Canaris’ believes that the principle of risk is the priority because people who make a representation should be responsible for the risk. The author believes that the form the responsibility is the result of several elements, and the conclusion could not only be directly drawn from one party. We can draw Canaris’ view to consider the imputability.Chapter SixThe chapter aims at discussing the rebuilding of reliance protection principle and the specific construction system under such guidance. Firstly, we should establish the independent status of reliance protection principle in private law and design it under the civil code system in a proper manner. Secondly, the entire relevant reliance protection principle in our country will be discussed in two classification, namely positive reliance protection and negative reliance protection, which is to perfect the existing system that are not perfect and fulfill classification of reliance protection that is defective. Active reliance protection includes adult by estoppel under civil subject, bona fide acquisition, ostensible agency, creditor’s rights of apparent transfer system, etc. Passive reliance protection includes specific systems such as cancellation of inaccurate declaration of will, unauthorized agency, contracting negligence, etc. Characteristic of reliance protection system should be in an open manner and absorb systems with constitutive requirements of reliance protection gradually.更多还原