【作者】 王国侠；

【导师】 吕岩峰；

【作者基本信息】 吉林大学 ， 国际法学， 2004， 硕士

【摘要】 国际私法的基本制度包括识别、反致、法律规避、外国法的查明和公共秩序保留。它们是随着冲突法的产生而逐渐形成的。由于冲突法是以内国法的方法来调整包含外国因素的民商事关系，因此在冲突规范的适用过程中出现一系列问题，如识别、反致等，它们异常复杂，最终发展成为国际私法的基本制度。现阶段，以冲突法为主体的国际私法地位的提升，以及国际民商事交往形势变化所引起的国际私法价值取向的变化，都要求对国际私法基本制度的研究予以重视。由于国际民商事关系发展状况是客观和普遍的，特定历史时期国际私法在价值取向上往往表现出某种共性和趋势性的倾向，这些共性和倾向当然会对国际私法的基本制度产生影响。现阶段国际私法的价值取向主要表现在：力求结合法的确定性和灵活性，兼顾冲突法正义和实体法正义，立足国际社会本位。因此，研究和完善国际私法基本制度就应以此为指导。关于识别。国际私法中的识别问题，是确定准据法的必经阶段。在直接确定当事人的权利义务关系的法律得以确定之前，把某一需要调整的涉外民商事关系与该法联系起来的过程就是识别，实质上识别的目的就是要弄清有关事实和问题的法律归属。识别冲突的存在使得识别成为国际私法上的特殊问题，并发展成为国际私法的一项基本制度。对识别冲突如何解决，传统上存在着不同的理论和做法。现阶段，解决识别问题，应该在分析比较法学的理论基础上完善国际私法的立法，在实践中更新观念，以新法院地法说作为识别的标准，也就是不仅依照内国的实体法，还要依照在吸收分析比较法说合理内核基础上形成起来的冲突法进行识别。关于反致。反致制度产生一百年来，对其存废之争从未停止。赞成者<WP=59>认为采用反致制度有种种好处：避免当事人挑选法院，保证判决结果的一致；扩大内国法的适用；维护外国法律体系的完整性，尊重外国主权；增加法律选择的灵活性，有利于个案公正。反对者则认为采用反致制度存在诸多弊端：导致恶性循还；有违法律的确定性和可预见性，有损法律尊严，也不利于当事人利益维护；有否定内国冲突法之嫌，有损内国主权；增加法官负担，造成实际不便。实际上，这些否定反致制度的理由要么是不存在的，要么是可以克服的。现阶段反致制度仍有其存在的价值和必要。冲突规范连结点的软化与反致并不存在矛盾。实际上，反致制度与最密切联系原则在内在精神上是一致的，还有其自身的优势，它可以把法官的自由裁量权限制在一定限度内。在现阶段，应从立法和司法两个方面对反致制度加以完善。关于法律规避。国际私法上的法律规避，是指在涉外民商事法律关系当中，如果当事人为逃避本应适用的强制性法律规范，并使得对其有利的法律得以适用，故意制造或变更冲突规范的范围或连结点的事实构成因素，法院则根据当事人的主观恶性，对行为做出否定评价，并恢复适用原强制性法律规范，以维护法律的尊严。法律规避的产生有主、客观两个方面的原因。客观上一方面是由于各国实体法的差异，另一方面是由于冲突法赋予了当事人选法的自由。主观上，从当事人角度讲，是源于当事人趋利避害的本能；从国家角度讲，由于承认法律规避的效力往往导致内国法的适用，所以国家对此加以默许甚至纵容。法律规避的构成要件包括：主观上的故意；客观上改变连结因素或冲突规范范围的事实状况；对象为强制性的法律规定；结果上具有既遂性。对于法律规避的效力问题，应改变传统上承认规避外国法效力的做法，对规避内外国法的效力一律加以否认。关于外国法的查明。外国法的查明，是指一国法院根据本国冲突规范<WP=60>的指定，当某一涉外民商事关系，应以某一外国实体法为准据法时，如何证明该外国法关于这一特定问题的具体规定的问题。传统上由于对外国法性质上认识的差异，使得各国在外国法的查明途径、外国法无法查明时的解决办法及外国法适用错误的补救等一系列问题上采取不同的态度和做法。实际上，外国法在性质上既非事实，也非完全等同于内国法的法律，更不是什么模棱两可的法律事实。外国法就是一种法律，一种特殊性质的法律。因此，在外国法的查明途径上，当事人和法官应相互配合，一方面由当事人双方提供，互相质证，另一方面也在立法上规定法官依职权查明的情况和可以直接认知所知悉法律的情形。在外国法无法查明的情况下，重新考虑其它与纠纷有关的法律规定，从中选择除该外国法外与纠纷仍有较密切联系的法律加以适用，而不能不分情形一概代之以内国法。当外国法适用错误时，也应如内国司法一样，允许当事人通过上诉、申诉等方式进行补救。关于公共秩序保留。公共秩序保留制度，是指一国法院依其冲突规范本应适用外国法时，认为该外国法的适用会与法院地国的重大利益、基本政策、道德的基本观念或法律的基本原则相抵触而排除其适用的一项制度。这里的公共秩序是私法上的秩序，而不是公法上的秩序；是国际私法上的公共秩序，而非国内民法上的公共秩序。它包括一国私法领域体现法律的精神和宗旨的基本原则和一国所应承担的条约义务。判断外国法的适用违背公共秩序的标准有客观说和主观说两种。其中，客观说中的结果说真正地从客观角更多还原

【Abstract】 The basic systems of private international law include characterization, renvoi, evasion of law, proof of foreign law and reservation of public order. They took shape on basis of conflict law. Because conflict law takes the method of internal law to solve civil-commercial disputes containing foreign elements, during the application of foreign law it occurs to many problems such as characterization. Eventually these ordinary problems were developed into the basic systems of private international law. Today the study of basic systems of private international law is necessary for at least two reasons. One reason is that the promotion of status of private international law, of which conflict law is the main body, lays emphasis on the study of basic systems. The other reason is that diversity of situations has made traditional systems unsuitable for modern international law. Although in different times countries take different attitudes towards the basic systems according to different values, in some special historical period there are some values in common, for the economic background of private international law is common and objective. So in modern times we should research these basic systems under the modern theory of private international law. Namely, modern basic systems should embody definitude and flexibility of law, give consideration to both the justice of conflict law and that of positive law, and be restituted according to theoretical concepts of international society standard.Characterization. Characterization is the first step of determining the applicable law. It is such a course that some civil-commercial dispute <WP=63>containing foreign element is allocated to its correct legal category. Existence of conflict makes characterization especially complicated and makes it developed into a basis system eventually. About the standard of characterization there are different theories and practices traditionally. In modern times, to solve the characterization problem, we should renew our sense, take the theory of new lex fori as the standard of characterization. In other words, we should characterize not only according to the internal positive law but also according to the conflict law, which absorbs the rational factor of the theory of analytical jurisprudence and comparative law.renvoi. Controversies never stop since renvoi arose. Protagonists of this theory consider that the adoption of this basic system has many benefits, including achieving the same decisions, expanding application of internal law, protecting the integrity of foreign law, and guaranteeing justice of specific case. While jurists who reject this system argue that the adoption of renvoi will lead to the following malpractices: vicious circle, damaging the dignity of law, being unfavorable to protect parties’ rights, and derogating sovereignty. In fact, the reasons that renvoi is denied are untrue or can be overcome. In modern times renvoi still has its own value and is necessary for private international law. It should be perfected from the theory and practice.Evasion of law. As a kind of basic system it indicates such a circumstance that if parties deliberately create or change the facts, which constitutes the fact of operative facts or point of contact, in order to evade the obligatory law that ought to be applicable <WP=64>and make the favorable law be applied, the court may deny the effect of parties’ conduct and still apply the obligatory law. Evasion of law came into being for two reasons. The first reason is objective. On the one hand, positive laws of countries are different. On the other hand, conflict law endows parties the freedom to choose the law. The second reason is subjective. Parties’ instinct of pursuing benefits and escaping danger and countries’ acquiescence or even indulgence for it also lead to evasion of law. We should change the traditional way that admits the effect of evasion of law, and deny the effect of evasion of both foreign law and internal law in the legislation and practice.Proof of foreign la更多还原