对情事变更原则的比较考察及借鉴

【作者】 张岚岚；

【导师】 董灵；

【作者基本信息】 对外经济贸易大学 ， 法学， 2003， 硕士

【摘要】 自从1993年法学家们提出合同法立法方案开始，情事变更就一直是人们关注的话题。1999年3月15日，九届人大二次会议正式通过了《中华人民共和国合同法》。根据全国人大法律委员会《关于合同法草案审议结果的报告》："......三、关于情势变更制度。这是一个很复杂的问题，在合同法起草过程中，就有不同意见。这次大会审议，不少代表提出，根据现有的经验，对情势变更难以作出科学的界定，而且和商业风险的界限也难以划清，执行时更难以操作，实际上只有在非常特殊的情况下才能适用情势变更制度，现在在合同法中作出规定条件尚不成熟。法律委员会经过反复研究，建议对此不作规定。......"因此，合同法没有对情事变更原则作出规定。那么，情事变更原则到底有没有存在的必要，它的价值在哪里？笔者试图从比较法的角度探寻其渊源及发展的脉络，分析阐述情事变更原则引入我国法的障碍及其排除，通过国内外若干代表性案例对情事变更原则进行研究。论文除第一章引言和第六章结论外，共分四个部分。在第二章，论文以比较各大陆法系国家立法沿革和现状，宏观介绍了情事变更原则的起源、发展。大陆法系国家通过立法或判例来确认情事变更原则，实为诚信原则在债法中的具体体现。不过大陆法系国家对于情事变更之范围的态度不尽一致：以《法国民法典》为代表，情事变更与不可抗力是不作区别的（见该法典第1148条之规定）；而德国的民法理论及司法实践则力图将情事变更与不可抗力区分开来。（见《德国民法典》第157条、第242条及1924年的《第三次紧急租税令》、1925年的《增额评价法》、1952年的《法官契约协助法》）。在我国学说上，情事变更原则是被普遍承认的。1992年 "武汉市煤气公司诉重庆检测仪表厂煤气表装配线技术转让合同、煤气表散件购销合同违约纠纷案"应为我国司法实践正式适用情事变更原则判决的第一个案例。在理论上，立法上和实践上都有重要意义。最高人民法院1993年5月6日颁布实施的《全国经济审判工作座谈会纪要》指出：由于不可归责于当事人双方的原因，作为合同基础的客观情况发生了非当事人所能预见的根本性变化，以致按原合同履行显失公平的，可以根据当事人的申请，按情势变更的原则变更或解除合同。这一《纪要》虽不是司法解释，不具有实证法律的效力，却可以视为法院审判实践中形成的"裁判上固定见解"而为各级法院遵从，有着实际上的效力。 第三章论文提出了我国引入情事变更原则的困难。从合同法草案的讨论过程反映出来，这种障碍主要体现在两个方面：其一是理论方面的障碍，其一是操作方面的障碍。在理论方面，笔者比较分析了情事变更原则与不可抗力、商业风险的区别，并指出情事变更原则是诚实信用原则的下位原则，提出其它法律规则优先适用于情事变更原则。在实际操作方面，中国审判实践中已经有承认情事变更的判例，合同法不规定这一原则并不能阻止法院根据情事变更理论裁判案件。与其如此，莫不如对情事变更原则作出明文规定，使法庭或仲裁庭在适用这一原则时有所遵循，减少裁判的任意性，减少滥用的危险。因此，笔者坚持立法上应从<WP=4>长远角度来考察情事变更原则的功能，维护社会的实质正义，我国应当在修改《民法通则》或制定民法典时，增加情事变更原则条款。第四章笔者试图从各国案例比较入手，分析情事变更原则的适用要件。这也是本文的重点。情事变更原则有如下适用要件：第一，不可预见性；第二，不可归责于当事人；第三，显失公平。由于对情事变更的司法裁判以及学说讨论在德国最为活跃，其经验和对策也最具参考借鉴的价值，故以作为德国通说的行为基础理论所作的类型分析为出发点，探讨了我国情事变更的类型化问题。第五章笔者初步探讨了情事变更原则的效力问题。提出我国引入情事变更原则应参考比照国际惯例，与国际接轨，"再交涉义务"已被国际商事合同通则以及欧洲合同法原则所肯定，我国合同法草案也曾尝试借鉴，但最终随同整个条文而被删除了。虽然如此，笔者认为，在我国的情事变更原则之法理上，是应当肯定"再交涉义务"的存在的。通过论证，笔者得出这样的结论——从近代法律思想的演进历程来看，随着权利本位向社会本位的过渡，合同观念由唯意志论向构筑合同自由的实质正义内核转化，合同法律制度从封闭自足、由严密精确法律概念组成的规范体系，向开放多元、充满价值关怀和注重利益衡平的的规范体系发展。通过诚信原则的解释适用进行法律漏洞补充，出于维护公平正义、利益衡平目的，承认扩大了法官的自由裁量权，成为现代合同法制度的闪亮标志。情事变更原则正是这些革命性变化的衍生物。从理论上来讲，我国学者对情事变更制度的理论研究取得了一定的成就，可以为审判实践提供指导。而且，国外相关的审判经验和理论成果也为我国提供了有益的借鉴，我们有理由相信法院会运用好情事变更原则来解决合同履行中的问题。情事变更原则作为一项在瞬息万变的现代生活中不可或缺的法律制度，在融合了两大法系之长的现代化民法典中应有其一席之地。更多还原

【Abstract】 When jurists submitted the legislative motion of contract law in 1993, clausula rebus sic stantibus has been a hot topic ever since then.The Contract Law of the People’s Republic of China was adopted at the second meeting of the 9th National People’s Congress on March 15,1999. According to the contract law draft review report presented by the NPC Law Committee," ……III. The principle of clausula rebus sic stantibus. This is a very complex problem and there were different opinions in the process of making the law. At this reviewing meeting, many representatives put forward that based on the current experience it is difficult to make a scientific definition of clausula rebus sic stantibus and make a clear distinction with business risk, moreover, it is more difficult to enforce it, therefore it is not ripe to provide it in the contract law now though there may exit very special cases where clausula rebus sic stantibus can be applied to. The law committee suggests not making a provision on it after cross study. …… " Therefore, the contract law did not prescribe clausula rebus sic stantibus. However, what’s on earth the necessity of the principle of clausula rebus sic stantibus and what is its value? The writer tries to find out its source and evolution from the perspective of comparative study, thereby further analyze the obstacles to introducing the principle of clausula rebus sic stantibus into our contract law and finally put forward the possible solutions by means of making a study on both domestic and foreign related typical cases.There are total six parts including the preface as Chapter 1 and the conclusion as Chapter 6.In Chapter 2, through comparing the legislative history and status quo of various civil law countries, the thesis introduces the source and evolution of the principle clausula rebus sic stantibus. It is recognized by civil law countries through legislation or cases that the principle of clausula rebus sic stantibus indeed embodies the principle of good faith in obligation law. However the opinions of civil law countries on defining the scope of clausula rebus sic stantibus are different.Represented by the Civil Code of France, there is no difference between clausula rebus sic stantibus and force majeure( see Article 1148 of the Civil Code of France);While the civil theories and judicatory practice of Germany tries to differentiate clausula rebus sic stantibus from force majeure (See Article 157, 242 of the Civil Code of Germany, etc).In the legal theory of our country, the principle of clausula rebus sic stantibus is recognized generally.In the case of Wuhan Coal Gas Company V. Chongqing Instrument Examination Factory on the matter of violating the technique transfer contract and sale contract in 1992, the principle of clausula rebus sic stantibus was formally applied to in our judicatory practice for the first time.It has important impacts on the theory, the legislation and the practice. The National Economic Trial Session Summary promulgated by the Supreme People’s Court on May 6, 1993 pointed out: Because of reasons couldn’t attribute to two parties, the circumstances, as the root of a contract, have substantially changed, which is beyond the<WP=6>predictability of two parties. As a result, it is unconscionable to continue to perform the contract so that the contract can be altered or revoked according to the principle of clausula rebus sic stantibus based on the parties’ application. Although it is not an judicial interpretation in terms of legal effectiveness, the Summary, considered as the fixed legal opinion formed through trials, can be adopted by the courts at all levels and thus has its legal binding force in fact.In Chapter 3,the thesis brings up the difficulties in introducing the principle of clausula rebus sic stantibus. From the discussion process of contract law draft, there are two aspects of the obstacle: One is theoretical obstacle and the other is practical obstacle. In terms of theory, the writer compares the principle of clausula rebus sic stantibu更多还原