摘要
在“结构—功能”主义理论之下,功能主义与规范主义之间既存差异又可辅成。大陆法系国家在法典上解决两者之间的冲突并实现融合的可行路径,一方面是脱逸于法典外的制度确立,另一方面是制度引入后对原有规范体系的系统化调整。我国《民法典》未采第一种路径,而现阶段基于立法稳定的可行路径是,运用法解释学工具消解争议并实现融合。针对动产抵押与动产质押的同质化,可通过对动产抵押的客体进行严格限定的方式,将《民法典》第395条第1款第7项的兜底条款进行限定,即仅允许能够进行登记的特殊动产进行动产抵押。针对基于融资需求所确立的动产浮动抵押所形成的体系反应,则可通过脱逸物权担保或确立商事规则的路径,将浮动担保解释为债权性担保或者商事法上的特殊构造。通过上述路径,既可以保障引入制度的功能化需要,又不至于形成体系之间的龃龉与冲突。
Under the theory of structural functionalism,there are differences and complementarities between functionalism and normativism.The feasible path for civil law countries to resolve the conflict and achieve integration in the code is,on the one hand,to establish the system out of the code,and on the other hand,to systematically adjust the original normative system after the introduction of the system.China's Civil Code does not adopt the first path,but at this stage,based on the stability of legislation,the feasible path is to use the tools of hermeneutics to resolve disputes and achieve system integration.In view of the systematic reaction caused by the homogenization of chattel mortgage and pledge,Article 395(1)(7)of the Civil Code can be limited by strictly defining the object of chattel mortgage,that is,only special chattels that can be registered are allowed to mortgage chattels.In response to the system reaction formed by the floating mortgage of movable property established based on the financing demand,the floating guarantee can be interpreted as a debt guarantee or a special structure in the commercial law by escaping the real right guarantee or establishing the commercial rules.Through the above path,we can not only guarantee the functional needs of the introduced system,but also avoid the formation of discord and conflict between systems in the general rule system.
出处
《北方法学》
北大核心
2023年第3期18-30,共13页
Northern Legal Science
基金
国家社会科学基金重大项目“民法典编纂的内部与外部体系研究”(18ZDA141)的阶段性成果。
关键词
动产抵押
浮动抵押
功能主义
规范主义
结构功能主义
chattel mortgage
floating mortgage
functionalism
normativism
structural functionalism
