본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

彩礼给付和返还的规范构造

The Normative Structure of the Performance and the Restitution of Betrothal Gifts

0

조회

0

다운로드

0

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

초록

新中国成立以来,中国法一直以司法解释的方式处理彩礼给付和返还 的问题,未将其纳入国家法. 因法律对婚约采回避态度,且强调彩礼和借 婚姻索取财物的区分,使彩礼相关规定具有中国特色. 新颁布的《彩礼纠 纷规定》弥补了《民法典婚姻家庭编解释(一)》第5条在彩礼返还事由 和返还范围方面的缺失,用酌定要素和比例返还的灵活规定,扩张了原 先的封闭规则和“全有全无”的刚性后果. 由此,中国法上就彩礼问题已经 形成了相对独立的规范群. 这些规则本质上关联不当得利返还体系,但鉴 于最高人民法院在彩礼问题上一直有意识地未对接财产法规范和教义学 构造,且学说上对彩礼给付行为的定性或失之偏颇,或殊途同归而无关 紧要,因此可以采用“准用不当得利法律效果”的技术,彩礼给付行为无需 定性,现有规定经解释皆可融入不当得利法效果,而目前规定未涉及的 得利丧失判断和对第三人直索等问题,仍可以《民法典》第985条以下规 则来解决.

Abstract

Since the founding of P.R. China, the issue of performance and restitution of betrothal gifts has been dealt with in Chinese law not by national law, but only by way of judicial interpretations. Because the law avoids the affiance and emphasizes the distinction between the betrothal gifts and seeking property through marriage, the chinese provisions relating to betrothal gifts have their own characteristics. The newly released Supreme People’s Court’s Provisions on Betrothal Gifts Disputes make up for the absence of Article 5 of the Interpretation I of the Supreme People’s Court on the Application of the “Marriage and Family” Book the Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China in respect of the basis and the scope of restitution of betrothal gifts, and expands on the previous closed rules and the rigid consequences of the “all-or-nothing” rule with flexible provisions on discretionary elements and proportional restitution of betrothal gifts. As a result, Chinese law has formed a relatively independent group of norms on the issue of betrothal gifts. These rules are essentially related to the system of unjust enrichment, but given that the Supreme People's Court has consciously neglected the connection with the doctrinal system of the Law of Obligations on the issue of betrothal gifts, and academic opinions about the legal nature of performance of betrothal gifts in the doctrine is either biased or irrelevant, the method of “Rechtsfolgenverweisung” of unjust enrichment can be adopted. The dispute over the legal nature is of little benefit, the current provisions can be interpreted to incorporate the legal effect of unjust enrichment, while the issues of elimination of enrichment and direct claims against third parties, which are not covered by the current provisions of betrothal gifts, can still be resolved by the following provisions of Article 985 of the Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China.

참고문헌 (5)

  1. 姚明斌, "彩礼返还请求权的规范构造", 南大法学, (4) (2023)
  2. 夏静宜, "原因欠缺导致赠与财产返还的原理和规则", 交大法学, (1) (2024)
  3. 汪洋, "彩礼范围与返还事由的体系再造—最高人民法院〈彩礼纠纷规定〉释评", 妇女研究论丛, (2) (2024)
  4. 王泽鉴, "不当得利" (2015), 北京大学出版社
  5. Medicus, "Schuldrecht II: Besonderer Teil" (2018), München

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (10건)