民法自然债研究

【作者】 覃远春；

【导师】 李开国；

【作者基本信息】 西南政法大学 ， 民商法学， 2007， 博士

【摘要】 民法自然债是一个与民事债和纯粹道德义务既有联系又有区别的范畴，它也是一个存在于无效民事关系与被法律强制保护的民事关系之间的缓冲物和过渡物，可以说是处于有效白色地带与无效黑色地带之间的灰色地带之中。关注自然债，并不是要冲击和否定现有债的观念，也不是要对债法体系另起炉灶，而是力图将易被民事债遮掩的有益部分显现出来，从逻辑上周延债的构成，一定程度上实现对民事债拾遗补缺，并紧密结合民事债构建一个“邻接体系”。而理论和制度的研究并非天马行空、脱离实际，而是以解决现实中的问题为依归的。本文带着对民事债拾遗补缺、构建我国民法自然债制度和面向社会生活问题的法律解决这一基本目的，展开对“非主流”的民法自然债的初步探索。文章通过说明自然债的含义、类型、权能及阐释自然债的本质，以求获得对自然债概括和一般性的理解：通过考察自然债在罗马法上的起源和演进、介绍自然债的现代民法表现，以求获得对自然债在具体法制中展开的直观印象；通过对几种典型类型的自然债加以分析和说明、排除易混淆的不法原因给付，以求获得对自然债运用和表现的深入理解；文章并对我国民法建构自然债制度提出了初步的建议。此外，自然债具有方法论意义，在从自然债出发的衍生性思维的引导下，本文附带尝试提出自然物权概念并归纳出民法上不具强制保护力的自然权利类型。文章总的特点是抓住自然债本质这个基础性问题，在寻求自然债实质精神或核心内容规定性的基础上，即在对自然债本质获得深入而统一认识的基础上，围绕自然债的含义、类型和效力等核心问题进行分析说明(罗马法、现代民法的考察分析亦不脱离这些问题)。本论文主体部分基本遵循由一般到特殊、由宏观到微观、由远及近、由域外至域内的逻辑来安排体系结构。第一章民法自然债概述。介绍和评析关于自然债含义的各种阐释，提出本文对自然债含义的理解并说明自然债概念的有用性；对自然债的类型进行一般性介绍，立基于民事债的基本权能说明自然债的权能构成特点；介绍关于自然债本质的论争并加以评说，提出本文的理解。关于自然债的含义。罗马法没有对自然债含义进行说明，现代民法学说和立法，有从债的内容和性质角度用道德、自然、衡平等来作实质说明的，有从权能或效力角度作形式阐释的。文章认为，单纯从有特性的实质内容或者从效力、权能角度定义自然债都是不适当的。而“确定不可诉债务的本性是可能做到的”、“应该把引发应该做的当为的意思关系从自然债的概念来把握”，从这种“本性”即自然债内容上的规定性出发，自然债的定义应该概括整合“债”和“自然”的用词含义。从内容实质与效力形式两方面结合，可以尝试这样说明自然债的含义：自然债，指当事人负有的受一般道德标准或社会观念支持的、法律虽不强制其履行但在自愿履行后即维护履行效果，给付人不得请求返还，受领人得受领并保有给付的债。文章认为，自然债内容的实质规定性和形式效力的统一性是可以寻找的，自然债一词具有历史渊源，同时也反映和顺应现实之发展，能归纳说明民法中特殊的法律现象，其独特作用是其它民法概念所不宜取代的，因此不能否认自然债概念及自然债制度的有用性。关于自然债的类型与权能(效力)。自然债一词只是对各种具体自然债事例的概括称谓，它并非一个单一的实体关系。文章列举了属于自然债的主要情形，并按照形成时间、是否基于当事人合意、效力强弱、效力不完全的不同状态等对其作了简单分类。文章提出了对民事债基本权能构成的看法，认为债权基本权能包括实行权能(涵盖请求、受领和保有权能)、保全权能、救济权能和处分权能。与此相对照，自然债所必备的最基本权能是实行权能中的受领保有权，这是在债务人自愿履行时将自然债蕴含的道德预期利益转化为现实利益的关键权能，与此相应给付人不得请求返还。在总的实行权能上，可以认为自然债仍有实行权能。自然债所必不具备的权能乃救济权能中的强制执行权，在总的救济权能上，自然债至少是受到极大限制的。由于无法强制执行，自然债也不具备与此紧密相连的保全权能。至于处分权能，虽然具体的处分方式可能因自然债种类不同而有差异，但是作为自然债整体命运的决定似乎不可能被完全排除，因此可以说仍有处分权能(典型者为抛弃)。因此，自然债具有实现利益的一定实行权能和债务整体的处分能力，但救济权能受到限制且无保全权能。自然债权能的共通性与自然债关系内容的规定性，一起决定了概括自然债之可能。其它通常所说的对自然债承认、更新、间接给付、提供担保等等引起的变化，有“额外”行为附加，严格说来并非自然债的权能(效力)。但自然债毕竟为行为附加提供了一种“基础”关系，从这个意义上也可以将它们看成是自然债的效力，这也是判例学说中多使用的情况。而自然债原为民事债时依附于身的留置、担保是否继续有效，主要是物权效力是否受债的性质变化而受影响的问题，但由于需要结合债的关系以实现目的，因此也可作为自然债所涉效力探讨。至于抵销、转让、质押、抛弃等不需附加任何额外行为，应作为自然债本身的处分权能所涉。围绕自然债效力的强弱、是否应该依个案确定效力等发生的争议，主要是涉及以上这些权能表现的情况。关于自然债的本质。法学理论关于自然债的本质主要存在两种不同观点，文章介绍和分析了自然债与民事债实质相同理论(民事债贬降说)和实质相异理论(道德义务升华说)，认为它们都是围绕着实定法的某方面规定进行阐释的，各有值得采撷之处和不足，不妨在不同的场合采用不同的理论。如果非要作统一说明的话，要做的不过是尽量吸收既存理论的优点，找寻它们可能的联结点，用较抽象的表述来概括而已。自然债所涉关系包含了一定法律联系因素。民事债贬降理论阐释的自然债关系内容体现法律联系因素是明显的：道德义务升华理论阐释的义务人履行或承诺之前的关系实际上也具有一定法律上联系的因素，并非纯粹的道德义务，①履行前的自然债务(道德义务)中就包含了使之产生法律效果的功能。②在法律联系因素之外找寻自然债的共同根基，可以发现这就是自然债关系内容表现出来的规定性，即当事人之间存在一种良心压力达到相当程度而应为的某种财产性给付义务，法律尊重并适当助力这种给付义务落实，乃属应为之事。以这种较深层次的共同道德根基和自然债义务内容特性的理解为基础，结合前述的法律联系因素，可以说，自然债就是具有一定法律联系因素的、按照一般道德标准和社会观念在良心上形成相当压力的财产性给付义务关系，它是受法律适当尊重而入法的社会关系，这就是它的本质。第二章现代民法自然债的渊源探究：罗马法上自然债的确立及演进。介绍了罗马法上自然债的确立及理论基础，考察了罗马法纯正自然债与非纯正自然债，并总结对罗马法自然债的认识。当裁判官开启万民法之门户时，自然债务这一概念也随之被导入。③作为自然债根本理论基础的万民法(自然法)对罗马法产生影响的结果之一，就是欠缺强制执行力的自然债的出现。罗马法上民事债包含了“请求给付”与“法锁”，是一般所理解的债。自然债是缺乏法锁强制拘束的债，或者是仅受“自然法上衡平之锁”拘束的债。完整的自然债观念出现在拉贝奥随后不久的某个古典时期，当时自然法学说深入人心，斯多亚学说带来的开明和创新的态度无疑对自然债的产生有着潜移默化的影响。最初出现的自然债务是涉及不享有平等民事主体地位者的债务，即因家父权支配在债法领域内适当软化而被认可的受支配者缔结的债务。文章认为，债的市民法关系是对家长权为核心的家际交往的反映，受家长权支配的人没有对外交往的能力。当自然法观念引入以后，它首要影响的必定是这种作为罗马人原有法律的最原初和基础的法律关系。此外，市民法严格形式主义的存在也是诱发自然债的一个重要方面，正是市民法的严格性给自然法留下了入侵机会，通过引入自然债的方式挽救了相当一部分民事债的弃儿。在尤士丁尼法中存在纯正的自然债。这种自然债是本应具备与纯市民法债相同效力的民法债，但是这种“本应”却受到纯市民法标准判断的制约，以至于与其发生矛盾时本应有效的民法债要么“不能产生”，要么产生后“归于消灭”，从而只剩下自然债关系。文章对纯正自然债作了类型和效力方面的详细考察，自然债的类型是多样的，而其效力，除了给付后不得返还为共通效力外，其它效力并非是所有自然债在相同程度上都具备。随着自然法影响逐渐深入、道德观念不断进步、罗马法与基督教教会思想相互融合，罗马法自然债观念得到扩张，出现了非纯正的自然债。“法”以外的道德、宗教及其它社会领域，存在一些不应强加给立法者作为有效民法债但是需要在法律上适当考虑一定效果的财产给付义务，尤士丁尼法文献倾向于把这些归入自然债，赋予它们自然债的最基本效力。文章对尤士丁尼法中的非纯正自然债作了分类介绍。总结罗马法上的自然债，文章认为：罗马法上的自然债是罗马法发展到一定历史阶段的产物，是多种因素共同作用的结果，其中自然法观念及伦理道德原则的影响功不可没，堪称自然债的理论基础；罗马法上的自然债在概念、类型、效力等方面显示出一定的特点：罗马法上自然债的演化孕育了近现代契约理论的某些核心思想；罗马法上的自然债具有弥补法律与道德、事实之间差异的功能；罗马法上的自然债为在现代民法背景中思考自然债提供了良好启示。第三章自然债的现代民法表现考察。介绍现代不同立法对自然债的规定并加以比较评析。现代民事立法中普遍承继了自然债制度，或者存在类似于自然债的制度。文章依次介绍了自然债在法国法模式和德国法模式下的民法表现，介绍了英美法类似自然债的某些制度以及受大陆法和英美法双重影响的个别国家的民法规定。关于自然债的规定在大陆法系主要有两种立法模式：一是以《法国民法典》为代表的法国立法模式，意大利、阿根廷、智利和我国澳门地区民法典有类似规定，在此立法模式下，自然债在民法典中多被明确而一般性地规定，并被赋予一定的法律效力：二是以《德国民法典》为代表的德国立法模式，在这一立法模式下，民法典对自然债不作一般性或明确的规定，自然债散见于各个条文并被赋予一定法效果，如民法典中既有关于时效完成后的债的规定，又有不完全债和道德、礼仪义务履行的规定等，我国台湾地区民法有仿照德国民法的一些类似规定。英美法系虽无自然债这一制度，但有类似的道德义务学说和不可强制执行的合同制度。在深受大陆法影响的英美个别法域，如美国路易斯安那州，有以法国民法为蓝本的自然债规定。另外，在受大陆法和英美法双重影响的国家和地区，如菲律宾，民法典中明确规定了自然债，同时也规定了不可强制执行的合同。文章对自然债的现代民法规定特点作了简单总结，对英美法的规定模式和大陆法的规定模式作了简单比较，并总结、比较了大陆法不同模式关于自然债规定的特点。文章认为，总的来说法国法模式阐释自然债基本含义、列举典型自然债类型并保留新类型的可能性、说明自然债基本效力和必要共同效力的做法较优。当然就自然债含义如何阐释、列举哪些典型类型、基本效力之外是否适宜或如何确定共通效力等等，还有商酌的余地。第四章嗣后自然债的示例分析。为更好地获得对自然债的深入认识，本章研究了先期存在民事债而贬降为自然债的典型事例：不当判决免责后的自然债与消灭时效完成后的自然债。早在罗马法时期就存在将争讼程序消灭的债与不当判决免除的债作为自然债的情况，文章考察了法律诉讼时期、程式诉讼时期和非常程序时期的这种自然债。现代民法中不当判决免责后的自愿给付，一般认为不得要求返还，对此除了用自然债进行解释以外，还有用非债清偿、赠与说明的。经过分析，文章认为后两种说明都是不适宜的，而在既判力效果采取“实体法说”的“权利消灭”或“诉讼法说”的“权利存续但受阻隔”时，都可以按照“升华”说或“贬降”说确定有自然债存在，且自然债强调良心约束的实质基础符合一般民众的判断意思，用其来说明不当判决免责后的给付是较佳的。在既判力本质理论选择上，文章从诉讼法和实体法适当分离出发，认为“诉讼法说”更为妥当，用它来说明不当判决免责后自然债的确定是一个恰当的路径，显得简洁直接。罗马法中，诉讼基本发展趋势是从无期诉讼到有期诉讼，诉权与实体权在后期出现了区隔的迹象，自然债因为消灭时效完成后诉权消灭而得以遗留。消灭时效完成后债务贬降为自然债务，经各国民法继受确定为原则。文章总结各国民法关于消灭时效的规定，认为：现代民法一般都实质性地承认自然债的存在；这种自然债的效力有强弱的不同规定：时效完成一般并不对债的性质自动产生影响，也即自然债不能单纯因时效期间经过而产生；法律在规定消灭时效完成后债的效果时，多用“消灭时效完成后”、“时效届满的”等用语涵盖，未区别经抗辩前后或主张时效利益前后的情况，因此这种效果实际上包含了未主张抗辩时的民事债效果和主张抗辩后的自然债效果；民法一般规定了时效不得依职权适用，从而将民事债向自然债的转化交由当事人决定；自然债的效果与时效利益抛弃原则密切相连。我国现行民法中也存在民事债因为时效原因而贬降为自然债的情况，这是目前最为具体明确的自然债规定。文章对诉讼时效完成后如何产生自然债进行了解说，同时提出了完善我国民法有关规定的建议：采用类似于德国法抗辩权发生主义的基本模式；排除法院对时效的主动适用；规定债务人可放弃时效利益；扩展自然债的效力。第五章自始自然债的示例分析。为更好地获得对自然债的深入认识，本章研究了先期不存在民事债而升华为自然债的典型事例：道德义务升华为自然债的情形和因合同形式欠缺而作为自然债的情形。道德义务升华的自然债是自然债的主体类型，是现代自然债生命力表现之核心所在。罗马法时期的各种非纯正自然债属于道德义务被升华为自然债的个别实践。适应道德与法律适度融合的趋势，现代民法亦多承认这种自然债。文章认为，作为自然债内容的道德义务是具有财产性、确定性、必要性、客观性、变动性与差异性、包容性和良心约束特别性的道德义务。其中，良心约束特别性是自然债所蕴含道德义务的本质特征。凡是个人按照道德是非标准主观上存有良心上约束而应为者，都可称为道德义务。那种在道德上已经事先成为一种负担且在良心上具有相当的压力、依照一般社会观念应该加以偿付的义务，是属于自然债的道德义务。道德性赠与和一般赠与含有的道德负担和良心约束分量与此不同，这些情况所体现的给付人的道德高尚程度不同。德国民法主张，履行道德礼仪义务的自然债需要带有“履行法律上债务”的目的，这大大限制了自然债的范围，以致不得不把很多情况纳入履行道德义务的赠与当中，这是不适当的。文章主张我国民法应一般性地规定道德义务履行的自然债，并按照良心约束的强弱区别其与道德性赠与，同时应规定道德性赠与履行后不得返还，以消除可能由于司法判断不准带来的实质差异。对道德义务升华类的自然债不可能详列完整清单，文章举出了可归属于此的一些事例。因合同形式欠缺而作为自然债对理解和处理形式欠缺的合同保留了一条独特的途径，使我们突破了合同因形式欠缺而无效时对其仅能按照无效处理、履行后果应该回复原状的一般性思维，思考介于有效与无效之间合同关系存在的可能。罗马法上，受严格形式主义的限制，无特定形式简约确定的义务多只能作为自然债存在。伴随着教会法、近代自然法学思想的影响，被作为契约自由原则确立之前过渡物的无保护简约自然债，逐渐完成了向民事债的一般转换，“单纯合意即形成债”。不过因合同形式欠缺而作为自然债处理的做法仍然在现代民法中保留下来。现代合同形式的功能多样化，合同因欠缺形式而无效的，在不影响公共利益和第三人利益的场合，往往存在承认自然债的必要。履行治愈规则的运用也可使欠缺形式而无效的合同变为有效，其与自然债既有相似，也有不同。文章主张在存在治愈规则的情况下，可考虑将其看作吸纳自然债履行；对于无明文规定履行治愈合同为有效的场合，则适宜用自然债履行加以判断。文章认为，在我国，如果将合同欠缺形式的无效与强制性规范的确定很好地协调起来，从而认定“履行无效合同”会损害公共利益或第三人利益时，则合同无效后似不应承认治愈或可作自然债履行。但是，由于确认维护公共利益、第三人利益的合同形式宗旨是不容易的，而且这些利益又往往和当事人的利益交织在一起，这就导致并非所有确定合同形式欠缺即无效的规范的正当性都是毋庸置疑的。因此，在合同形式欠缺而无效的场合应该有考虑自然债的空间。沿此思路，可以考虑法律行为被确定为无效时遗留自然债的可能。第六章不法原因给付归入自然债类型的否定性分析。本章分析不法原因给付可否归入自然债的类型，否定将不法原因(如赌债)作为自然债，认为可以析出群众性博戏活动的给付作为自然债加以认可。各自然债具有统一道德根基，受一般道德标准和社会观念的正向支持。自然债的独立性、体系性和其独特法律价值的维护，需要通过厘清其与诸如不法原因给付之类的关系来落实。文章认为，不法原因给付首先是一种不当得利，其基础性效果是给付的返还而非不返还。从确定不法原因给付不得返还的理由上探究，可以发现其与自然债存在根本区别。通说认为，当事人因违反法律禁止规定及背于公序良俗的行为，而将自己置于法律规范之外，无保护的必要，并强调此乃基于“禁止主张自己之不法”或不洁净手的抗辩等原则。就对自然债含义作出简单阐释的立法来看，自然债含义实质上多强调道德、社会义务，难以包含不法原因给付这种“杂质”。就历史渊源看，罗马法不将不法原因给付不得回复确定为自然债的效果。将自然债作扩大化理解以包容不法原因给付，会使得自然债的实质根基无所定位，从而与从道德义务、良心约束角度来一般性地说明自然债的趋势不符。因此，不法原因给付与自然债在给付不得返还这种效果上的一致，并不代表二者实质上同一，“虽然同归，但却殊途”。对于赌债的给付，文章认为作不法原因给付判断是正确的，因此不属于自然债。为照顾生活常情，也为适应一般道德标准和社会观念的变化，可考虑从赌博活动中析出一部作为群众性娱乐博戏活动，因此产生的输赢给付可作为自然债关系处理。第七章我国民法自然债制度之建构。介绍我国现行法中存在的自然债类型，说明自然债制度的功能和意义，对我国民法自然债制度的构建提出了初步意见。本章归纳了我国现行法中存在的自然债类型，认为现行法中个别制度实质上参照域外法例承认了自然债的存在。但总的说，我国民法并无关于自然债制度的明确规定，既无自然债定义，也无自然债类型或效力等的统一规范。自然债制度具有诸多独特的功能和意义，我国亟需在民法中确立统一的自然债制度。文章简略分析了几个民法草案对自然债的规定情况，并认为法国法模式阐释自然债基本含义、列举典型自然债类型并保留新类型的可能性、说明自然债基本效力和必要共同效力的做法较优，我国民法自然债制度构建整体上可以参酌此种模式；同时，自然债的一般制度应在债法总则中规定。文章据此提出了我国民法自然债制度一般规定的初步设想。余论从自然债出发的衍生性思考：自然物权与民法上的自然权利。受自然债的方法论启示，提出了自然物权概念并作了民法上自然权利的初步归纳。给付不仅为债的关系所专有，物权请求权也有给付，也会出现缺乏强制保护的情况，而自愿的给付作出后也有维护其效果的必要。文章受自然债方法论的启示作了衍生性思考，尝试提出自然物权概念，并在其与自然债权的基础上探讨归纳民法自然权利的可能。更多还原

【Abstract】 Natural Obligation in civil law is a category connected with and different from CivilObligation and pure moral obligation, it is also a buffer or a transition thing in grey zoneinterposed between black zone of void civil relation and white zone of civil relationprotected by law. Research on Natural Obligation aims not to strike or deny the conceptionand system of Obligation Law already in existence, or start all over again with ObligationLaw, but to bring out a useful part hidden from view by Civil obligation, complete theobligation structure logically, glean omission and fill a vacancy left by Civil obligation tosome extent and establish a "adjoining system" adjacent to Civil obligation. Such gleaningand filling is not ivory-towered and abstract but takes problem-tackling as the end. With theaforesaid purposes this dissertation makes some preliminary research on the "anabranch"Natural Obligation. Through explaining the meaning, types, powers and essence of NaturalObligation, the dissertation provide a general comprehension of Natural Obligation;Through reviewing its" origin and evolution in Roman Law and introducing its exhibitionsin modem civil laws, the dissertation gives a straight impression of outspread of NaturalObligation in material laws; Through analyzing and explaining some model types ofNatural Obligation, excluding delivery out of illegal reason as Natural Obligation, thedissertation tries to help get a deep understanding of Natural Obligation and its applicationand exhibition; the dissertation also gives some preparatory advice on the establishment ofNatural Obligation system in China’s Civil Law. Besides, Natural Obligation hassignificance of methodology, guided by a derivative thinking set out from such obligation,the dissertation attempts to put forward the concept of Natural Real Right and considers thepossibility of generalizing the concept of Natural Right in civil law. The main characteristicof this dissertation lies in, based upon grasping the basic question of the essence of NaturalObligation, based upon seeking essence, spirit and determinant of its contents, i. e., upongetting a deep and united understanding of the essence of Natural Obligation, expoundingNatural Obligation surrounding such core questions as meaning, type and effect (theanalysis of Natural Obligation in Roman Law and modern civil laws does not deviate suchcore questions). According to the logical clue from general explanation to specialexplanation, from macroscopical observation to microscopical observation, from distanceviewing to vicinity viewing, from oversea research to domestic research, the dissertationarranges the main body of its contents. ChapterⅠsummarizes Natural Obligation in civil law. This part introduces someunderstandings about the meaning of Natural Obligation and puts forward its ownexplanation, analyzes the significance of the concept of Natural Obligation, generallyintroduces some types of such obligation, expounds the feature of its powers structure incontrast with that of Civil Obligation, shows the contestation about the essence of NaturalObligation of two main theories and gives comments and provides its understanding of theessence.There was no illumination of the connotation of Natural Obligation in Roman Law,some modem civil theories and legislations expound essentially according to the feature ofthe content of Natural Obligation and mainly use words to explain such as morality, natureand equality, others expound formally from an aspect of powers or effects. The dissertationbelieves such two ways of explanation are unsuitable, "it can be realized to ascertain thenature of Natural Obligation", "it should be grasped for the concept of Natural Obligationthat some acts of the party should be taken as to such relation", based on suchunderstanding of "nature", the explanation of the concept of Natural Obligation shouldinclude the meanings of its constructive elements of "obligation" and "natural". So from anaspect of combining its feature of contents and effects, Natural Obligation can be construedas follows: Natural Obligation means an obligation which the debtor burdens according tocommon ethics and social conception, with which the law does not enforce but protects thelegal effects after the debtor performed voluntarily, the debtor has no right to "condictioindebiti" (claim the delivery back) and the receiver has a right of "solutio retentio" (holdingthe delivery). The dissertation believes the unification of feature of contents and effects ofsuch obligation is not impossible, the concept of Natural Obligation has its historical originand reflects the trends of social development, it can sum up some special phenomena incivil law domain and can not be replaced by other concepts, the significance of the conceptof "Natural Obligation" is obvious and can not be denied.The concept of Natural Obligation is used to summarize all sorts of examples of suchobligation, not to signify a unitary ontic relation. The dissertation lists some main types ofsuch obligation and sorts them in accordance with time of formation, whether there is anagreement between parties or not, power being strong or weak and different states ofincomplete power. The dissertation thinks the basic powers and functions of CivilObligation include implementing power which covers asking, receiving and holding powers,preserving power, remedy power and disposition power. Compared with these powers,Natural Obligation certainly possesses receiving and holding power of implementing power, which is a key to realize interest transformation from an anticipative interest to a realisticone. It can be said Natural Obligation has implementing power as a whole. It is impossiblefor Natural Obligation to have power of enforceability of remedy power, and suchobligation is greatly restricted from the aspect of remedy power as a whole. Accordingly itis natural to exclude preserving power from the power structure of Natural Obligation. Asto disposition power, different examples of Natural Obligation differ in concrete dispositionstyle, but as a power concerning deciding the total fate of Natural Obligation, it can not beexclude entirely. So Natural Obligation is an obligation with partial implementing power,disposition power of deciding the total fate of itself, restricted remedy power and withoutpreserving power. Such common feature of powers, accompanying feature of its contentsensures the possibility of generalizing the concept of Natural Obligation.Other things like acknowledgement, novation, indirect performance and guarantee ofNatural Obligation or provided for Natural Obligation, strictly speaking, are not powers ofNatural Obligation because there are some additional acts. But Natural Obligation stillprovides a basic relation to suppo.rt such acts, so they can be regarded as powers of NaturalObligation, which is used like this by many legal precedents and theories. Whether Lienright and guarantee ever attached to such obligation keep functioning refers to whetherpowers of Real Right are affected by change of the nature of obligation, but it is necessaryto combine relation of obligation to achieve aim of Real Right, they also can be researchedas powers of Natural Obligation. As to compensation, transfer, pledge, giving up of NaturalObligation, they do not need additional acts and should be included in disposition power ofNatural Obligation. Controversies over intensity of power of Natural Obligation andnecessity whether to decide powers according to concrete examples mainly refer to suchpowers.There are two main theories concerning essence of Natural Obligation. One holdsNatural Obligation is identical to Civil Obligation essentially (theory of abasement of CivilObligation), the other holds the contrary (theory of exaltation of moral obligation). Thedissertation thinks both theories encircle some regulations of positive laws and have theirown drawbacks and strong points, so in different situations both theories may be used. If aunified theory is necessary, some work should be done to absorb merits and to seek apossible joint knot of the foregoing theories, and to express and generalize essence ofNatural Obligation in an abstract way. The relation included in Natural Obligation containssome factor of legal relation. The relation explained by theory of abasement of CivilObligation contains such factor obviously, and the relation explained by theory of exaltation of moral obligation also contains similar factor and differs from pure moral obligation (itcan be shown by a step-up force of moral obligation according to intensity of conscienceburden imposed on the party, Natural Obligation only refers to those relations containingstrong conscience burden, also shown by the certainty, worth and necessity features of suchspecial moral obligation included in Natural Obligation), Natural Obligation (moralobligation) prior to performance has already had a function of containing some legaleffects. Seeking a united foundation of Natural Obligation beyond the factor of legalrelation, the special feature of contents of Natural Obligation can be found, there existssome delivery obligation of worth which puts certain conscience burden on the giving party.In bringing such obligation into effect law shall respect and aid to some extent. Combiningthe united ethics foundation or feature of contents with the factor of legal relation, theessence of Natural Obligation can be explained as a delivery relation of worth containingsome factor of legal relation and certain conscience pressure in accordance with commonethics and social opinion, which is paid suitable attention by law and is a social relationalready step into the domain of law.ChapterⅡprobes into the origin of Natural Obligation, i. e. the establishment anddevelopment of Natural Obligation in Roman Law. This part reviews the emergence ofNatural Obligation and its theoretic foundation, reviews pure Natural Obligation andnon-pure Natural Obligation and summarizes a general understanding about NaturalObligation in Roman law."When judges opened the door of ius gentium, the concept of Natural Obligation wasintroduced", one result brought about by the influence of ius gentium(ius natuale) was theemergence of Natural Obligation with which the power of enforceability is excluded. CivilObligation in Roman Law contained right to request and civil law vinculum and wasregarded as the common said obligation. Natural Obligation lacked vinculum to enforce, orwas only constrained by vinculum of natural equality.The complete conception of Natural Obligation emerged in some era subsequent toLabeo times of classical times, when the theory of ius natuale went deep into people’sthoughts and the attitude of enlightenment and innovation brought by Stoics theoriesexerted subtle influence on the emergence of Natural Obligation. The first NaturalObligations referred to obligations entered into by those who have no equal status as a civilsubject, these obligations concluded by the dominatee were admitted as NaturalObligations as a result of softening of father right domination. Civil law relation ofobligation reflected inter-family activities with fatherhood as the core and those subject to fatherhood had no capacity to carry out external intercourses. With the conception" of iusnatuale introduced, it certainly gave some impact on such preliminary and fundamentallegal relations. Besides, strict formality of ius civile was also an inducing factor for thecoming into being of Natural Obligation. It was the rigidness of ius civile left chances forthe intrusion of ius natuale, through the introduction of Natural Obligation, some foundlingobligations left by Civil Obligation were saved in such way.There were pure Natural Obligations in Justinian’s corpus iuris civilis, which ought tohave had the same legal effects as those of Civil Obligations, restricted by strict standardsof ius civile, no obligation with such effect could not emerge or died out after its emergencefor they contradicted ius civile, so only left Natural Obligations in these situations. Thedissertation gives a detailed review of types and powers of pure Natural Obligation. Therewere many types of such obligation. As to their powers, apart from the effect of condictioindebiti, the other powers were not possessed by all types to the same extent. With thedeepening influence ofius natuale, the progress of ethics and the fusion of Roman Law andChristian thoughts, the conception of Natural Obligation expanded its influence andnon-pure Natural Obligation came into being. Some delivery obligation of worth in moral,religious and other social domains should be endowed some, though not complete legaleffects of Civil Obligation, legal effects in some degree. Justinian’s corpus iuris civilis wasinclined to put them in the category of Natural Obligation and endowed the fundamentalpower of Natural Obligation. The dissertation explains some sorts of such non-pure NaturalObligation in Justinian’s corpus iuris civilis.To summarize the stipulations of Natural Obligation in Roman Law, the dissertationsums up: Natural Obligation in Roman Law emerged in some special historical era as aresult of the combined influence of many factors, within which the influence of ius natualeand ethics played a key role and maybe called as the theoretic foundation of such obligation;Natural Obligation showed some features in its connotation, types and powers; theevolution of Natural Obligation in Roman Law gestated some important thoughts ofmodem theories of contract; Natural Obligation in Roman Law had a function of filling thevacancy between law and morality and facts; Natural Obligation system in Roman Lawgives some hints to ponder Natural Obligation in modem civil law background.ChapterⅢinvestigates the exhibitions of Natural Obligation in modern civillaws. This part introduces, compares different legislations concerning Natural Obligationand gives some comments.Modem civil legislations and laws universally inherit the system of Natural Obligation or stipulate similar systems in their own law bodies. The dissertation shows the exhibitionsof Natural Obligation in legislations of French style and German style and explains somesimilar systems in Common Law countries and introduces special legislation influenced byboth Continent Law and Common Law. There are two main legislation styles in ContinentLaw tradition countrieS, a representative legislation of style one is French Civil Code andItaly, Argentina, Chile, Macao follow such mode, under which Natural Obligation isstipulated clearly and generally and endowed some legal effects. A representativelegislation of style two is German Civil Code under which civil code has no clear andgeneral stipulations and Natural Obligations are dispersed in different provisions, e.g. thereare stipulations of obligation barred by extinctive prescription, stipulations of incompleteobligation, stipulations of moral and etiquette obligation separately, legislations of Taiwandistrict follow some provisions of this style. Common Law countries, though, without thesystem of Natural Obligation, have some similar systems like moral obligations (Materialbenefit rule) and unenforceable contract. Legislations in some states in these countries, theCivil Code of Louisiana State, e. g., deeply influence by Continent Law tradition, followNatural Obligations of French Civil Code. There are some legislations influenced by bothCommon Law and Continent Law tradition which stipulate both Natural Obligation andunenforceable contract, the Civil Code of Philippines is a typical one. The dissertationsummarizes the features of Natural Obligation in modem civil legislations and laws,compares stipulation styles of Common Law countries and Continent Law countries,summarizes and compares features of Natural Obligation legislations in Continent Lawcountries. The dissertation holds the mode of French style is better, with which theconnotation of Natural Obligation is explained, examples of Natural Obligation are listedand possible new examples are not excluded, basic and necessary powers and effects arelisted. Of course there should be some deliberations over how to explain the meaning ofNatural Obligation, what examples of Natural Obligation shall be listed and how commoneffects beyond basic effect shall be decided.ChapterⅣanalyzes some typical examples of Natural Obligation of abasementtype which are left when Civil Obligations disappear for some reasons. For a betterunderstanding of Natural Obligation, this part studies obligation left by incorrect judgmentand Civil Obligation was barred by extinctive prescription.In Roman Law era there were some examples of Natural Obligation resulted fromextinction of Civil Obligation due to litis contestation or due to incorrect judgment. Thispart reviews Natural Obligations in times of legis actiones, formula and cognition extra ordinem. It is commonly accepted voluntary delivery alter exemption of Civil Obligationby incorrect judgment can not be claimed back in modem times. Apart from NaturalObligation, there are theories of performance of non-obligation and gilt which are used toexplain this. The dissertation argues the latter two theories are unsuitable. NaturalObligation can exist according to theory of abasement of Civil Obligation or theory ofexaltation of moral obligation whatever theory of effect of judgrnent is used, it emphasizesa foundation of conscience burden and complies with general social opinion, so is a bettertheory for explanation. In choosing theory of essence of effect of judgment, the dissertation,based upon proper separation of substantive law and procedural law, holds the theory ofeffect of procedural law is more appropriate, it has features of concision and directness.There was a trend in Roman Law that actio perpetua evolved into actio temporalis andsome evidences showed in late Roman law times right to claim was separated to someextent from substantive right, Natural Obligation was left when prescription for litigation ofCivil Obligation passed. This practice is accepted as a principle in modem laws. Thedissertation holds that: modem legislations generally accept Natural Obligation is left whenCivil Obligation is ban-ed by prescription; there are different stipulations of effects of suchobligation; prescription passing does not spontaneously affect the nature of Civil Obligationand Natural Obligation is not matter-of-course only due to passing of limitation; whenreferring to effects of obligation ban’ed by prescription many legislations use words like"after the passing of prescription" or "after finish of limitation" and do not distinguisheffects of obligation whether there is an exception of limitation or not, so effects in suchprovisions in fact cover those of Civil Obligation and Natural Obligation; laws generallystipulate that the judge is not authorized to use prescription exception so leavetransformation from Civil Obligation to Natural Obligation at parties’ option; the effects ofNatural Obligation are connected with the principle of abandonment of prescription interest.In fact there are some stipulations of Natural Obligation in such situations and they are theclearest and most concrete provisions in our existing civil laws. The dissertation explainshow Natural Obligation comes into being after the extinction of limitation of actions andgives some advice to perfect relevant provisions of civil laws. The law should adopt thebasic mode of exception appearing of German law style, exclude active application ofexception by the judge, stipulate that the obligor is entitled to abandon limitation interestand expand the existing effects of Natural Obligation.ChapterⅤanalyzes some typical examples of Natural Obligation which come intobeing at starting when there were no Civil Obligations prior to their existence. For a better understanding of Natural Obligation, this part studies Natural Obligation exaltedfrom moral obligation and Natural Obligation due to lack of form of contract.Natural Obligation exalted from moral obligation constitutes the main body of NaturalObligation and is the point type of energy of modem Natural Obligation. Non-pure NaturalObligation in Roman Law belongs to this sort, in order to comply with the trend of fusionof law and morality modem civil laws generally accept such Natural Obligation. Thedissertation holds that moral obligation contained in Natural Obligation is characterized byworth, certainty, necessity, objectivity, mobility and othemess, inclusiveness and specialfeature of conscience burden, within which the special feature of conscience burden is thecore one. Moral obligation can be used to express obligations imposed by conscienceburden, within which that imposed by considerable conscience burden and deemed to beliquidated according to general social opinion belongs to obligation included in NaturalObligation. Gift induced by moral obligation and common gift are different from thisobligation in intensity of moral and conscience burden, these obligations show differentdegrees of ethics dignity.While explaining Natural, Obligation exalted from moral obligation, theories inGerman private circle argue a purpose of "performance of legal obligation" is necessarywhen the obligor performs obligation. Such opinion is not suitable for it restricts the scopeof Natural Obligation and has to leave many situations which should have fallen underNatural Obligation to the governance of gift induced by moral obligation. The dissertationadvises that our civil law should generally stipulate Natural Obligation exalted from moralobligation, distinguish itself from gift induced by moral obligation and deny claiming backthe delivery paid of gift induced by moral obligation, so eliminate discrepancy broughtabout by judicial inaccuracy in telling Natural obligation exalted from moral obligationapart from gift induced by moral obligation.Natural Obligation due to lack of form of contract provides a special way tounderstand and deal with contract wanting form, breaking the common way of thinkingthat we should regard such contract as void and the performance should be recovered to theoriginal state, makes us consider the possibility of a intervenient relation between validcontract and void contract. In Roman Law, restricted by strict formalism, pacta nuda couldonly engender a relation of Natural Obligation. Influenced by Canon Law and modem ideasof natural law theory, Natural Obligation of nude pact, ever looked upon as a transitionthing before the establishment of freedom of contract doctrine, gradually evolved to CivilObligation, "a mere consensus is enough to engender a Civil Obligation", but Natural Obligations due to lack of form of contract continues to exist in some situations where thereare stipulations of forms of contract. Because different forms of contract burden differentfunctions, when a contract becomes void due to lack of the form requirement, if notinfluencing public interest and a third party’s interest, it is necessary to consider thepossibility of Natural Obligation. Contract lacking form could also be healed as valid byapplication of the doctrine of contract healing, this doctrine has some similarities anddissimilarities with Natural Obligation. The dissertation advises when there be the doctrineof contract healing it be suitable to consider such doctrine absorbing the performance ofNatural Obligation, when such doctrine be not applicable it be suitable to consider theperformance of Natural Obligation. The dissertation holds: if we can harmonize the relationof compulsory norms and deciding void contract lacking of form and make sure thatperformance of void contract certainly impairs public interest and a third party’s interest,there will be no possibility of contract healing or performance of Natural Obligation as tovoid contract. Because it is difficult to decide whether the aim of form of contract isrelevant to public interest and a third party’s interest and such.interests interweave withparties’ interest, it is not indubitable that all provisions stipulating contract lacking form asvoid are reasonable. Space should be left for the consideration of Natural Obligationreferring to void contract due to lack of form. Spreading from such thinking way, it ispossible to ponder Natural Obligation as to other void legal acts.ChapterⅥanalyzes whether the delivery out of illegal reason could be coveredby Natural Obligation, denies regarding such delivery (e.g. gambling obligation) asNatural Obligation, advises to separate out mass gaming of amusement and considerthe payment of relevant delivery as performance of Natural Obligation.All Natural Obligations have a unified ethics foundation and all are supportedpositively by general ethics and social opinion. The maintenance of independence, systemand unique legal virtues of Natural Obligation shall be protected by telling NaturalObligation apart from relation like delivery out of illegal reason. The dissertation holds thatdelivery out of illegal reason firstly is an unlawful enrichment with the recovery of deliveryto the original state as the basic legal effect. We can find Natural Obligation isfundamentally different from such delivery from probing into the reason why such deliveryis not permitted to be claimed back. It is generally accepted that when a person positionshimself out of legal criteria by breaking prohibitiv.e norms or by acting contradictory topublic order and good custom, there is no need to give him protection, which is based uponthe principle of "Nemo auditur propriam turpitudinem allegans" or "clean hands". Observing legislations explaining the connotation of Natural Obligation, we can find suchdelivery out of illegal reason is excluded and moral or social obligation is emphasized.Reviewing its historical origin, we can get Roman Law did not regard the recovery of suchdelivery as the effect of Natural Obligation. Expanding types of Natural Obligation to coversuch delivery out of illegal reason will make it difficult to orient the essence of NaturalObligation, is contrary to the trend of expounding Natural Obligation from the point ofview of moral obligation and conscience burden. Delivery out of illegal reason havingsimilar effect of excluding recovery to that of Natural Obligation does not mean it is thesame as Natural Obligation, different roads lead to similar effects. As to performance ofgambling obligation, the dissertation holds that it belongs to delivery out of illegal reasonand can not included in the category of Natural Obligation. In order to respect commonfeeling of living, accommodate the change of general ethics and social opinion, based onadministration practice, we should consider separating out mass gaming of amusement andlook the payment of relevant delivery upon as performance of Natural Obligation.ChapterⅦgives some advice on the establishment of Natural Obligation systemin China’s Civil Law. The dissertation sums up examples of Natural Obligation stipulatedin China’s existing laws and believes there are several systems accepting the conception ofNatural Obligation on using oversea legislations for reference. But as a whole there is nodefinite system of Natural Obligation, lacks universal provisions explaining the connotation,types, powers and effects in existing civil laws. The system of Natural Obligation bearsmany unique functions and has much significance and it is urgent and necessary to establisha universal system of Natural Obligation in China’s Civil Law. The dissertation introducessome regulations concerning Natural Obligation of several drafts of Civil Code and holdsthe mode of French style is better, with which the connotation of Natural Obligation isexplained, examples of Natural Obligation are listed and possible new examples are notexcluded, basic and necessary powers and effects are listed. The establishment of NaturalObligation system should follows such mode and the universal system of NaturalObligation should be included in general rules of Obligations Law. The dissertation givessome preparatory advice on provisions of the general system of Natural Obligation inChina’s Civil Law.The last part of the dissertation, enlightened by significance of methodology ofNatural Obligation, puts forward the concept of Natural Real Right and considers thepossibility of generalizing the concept of Natural Right in civil law. Becauseperformance does not belong to the relation of obligation exclusively, Right of Real Claim also contains such performance and its protection of enforcement may be excluded incertain situations, and it is necessary to safeguard the effect of voluntary performance. Thedissertation attempts to put forward the concept of Natural Real Right inspired bymethodology significance of Natural Obligation and considers the possibility ofgeneralizing the concept of Natural Right in civil law based upon the concepts of NaturalObligation and Natural Real Right.更多还原