民初大理院民法解释例研究
|
摘要
民国初年是中国历史上一个大变革的时期,其间充斥着传统与近代、中国与西方价值观念的冲突与暗合,法律与现实、司法与政治在紧张之中寻求着均衡。在法制方面,新旧法律的适用极易发生混乱,且新旧交替,颇生歧义；而当时的立法机关——国会亦不能正常运作,无法正常履行立法职权。为了统一指导司法,当时的最高司法机关——大理院适应时局需要承担起创制法律的责任,以判例、解释例的方式代行“立法”,弥补了当时的立法缺陷,在实践中发挥了调整器的作用。因此,大理院的解释例在近代法制史上产生了一定的历史影响。大理院的解释例有其产生的历史必要性和可能性,也有其特定的运作方式,其内容和功能亦是非常丰富和有特色的。本文对民初民法的解释例进行解析,有利于我们研究在民法的近代化过程中解释例发挥了怎样的重要作用,同时也能引发我们对当今司法解释工作的现状作一思考。
在具体研究过程中,本文首先对民初大理院民法解释例的产生原因进行了分析,对其性质进行定位,并考察了其运作方式及风格；其次便开始对大理院民法解释例的具体内容进行剖析并总结其特点；再次发掘其功能并发现其背后的意义；最后对照我国民法近代化的过程及司法解释工作的现状进行了进一步思考,得到一些启示。
本文在研究时主要运用了以下几种方法。第一,考证的方法。本文所采用的主要资料是民初大理院有关民法方面的解释例。这些资料均为原始的第一手历史资料。对这些史料的收集、整理、解读的过程即为一个考证的过程。第二,分类的方法。该方法主要体现在对民初大理院民法解释例的分类整理和内容解读方面。笔者将民初大理院有关民法的解释例按现代民法的总则、债权、物权、亲属、承继五编分别整理并在此基础上进行内容的解读。第三,比较的方法。该方法一是运用于在分类基础上对民初大理院民法解释例的内容进行解读的过程中,主要涉及到民初解释例与传统民法解决办法的比较；二是运用于对我国当前司法解释工作借鉴意义的探讨中,主要是民初民法解释例与我国司法解释现状的比较。第四,逻辑语义的分析方法。在对民初大理院民法解释例的具体内容进行解读时,必然应字斟句酌,考察其语言环境和实际意义。第五,归纳的方法。即在对民法各编解释例进行解读的基础上,归纳出民初大理院民法解释例的总体特点。
通过对民初大理院民法解释例具体内容的解读,本文总结出大理院民法解释例的特点,考察民初大理院是如何运用解释例这一形式来处理当时的新旧民法法律冲突、解决民法近代化过程中固有法和继受法的整合问题的。另一方面,本文通过探讨民初大理院民法解释例的功能和意义,及与当今司法解释工作现状进行比较,发现目前存在的问题,并从大理院民法解释例中得到一些方法上的借鉴。
As a big transform period in Chinese history, the early Republic of China saw many kinds of contradictions and coincides such as traditional and modern,Chinese and western values' conflicts.Law and realityjustice and politics were seeking a balance in intense.In social legal system,the application between new and old laws was easily born up problems at that time,while the legislative institution congress could not carry out its function properly and could not take its responsibility well.In order to unify the guidance of justice,the highest national judicial institution----the Supreme Court,according to the demand of the times,undergone a part legislative right of congress by prejudication and interpretation model,which remedied the defect of legislation and played an important role as a regulator in practice.Therefore,the interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China had some historical significance in modern legal system's history.The interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China were produced with certain historical necessity and possibility.There was a specific mode of operation.The interpretation-models'content and function were also very rich and unique.In this paper,I will analyse the civil-law-interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China. It can enable us to study what important role the civil-law-interpretation-models played in Chinese civil law's modernization's progress.Meanwhile,it can lead us to think about our current judicial interpretation work.
In specific researching process,this paper will firstly analyse the producing causes of the civil-law-interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China,locate their nature and examinize their mode of operation and special style with it.Secondly,this paper will begin to analyze the specific content of the civil-law-interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China so that we can summarize their characteristics. Thirdly,the paper will explore the civil-law-interpretation-models'function and find the meanings behind it.Finally,I will think furtherly about the process of Chinese civil law's modernization and the current situation of the judicial interpretation's work and get some inspirations.
This paper will mainly use seveal ways as follows in researching process.First,the researching method.The main source that this paper uses is the civil-law-interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China.They are all of the original first-hand hitorical information.The process of collection,collation and interpretation on these historical information shall be a researching process.Second,the method of classification.This method is mainly reflected in two aspects.One is classification and collation on the civil-law-interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China.The other is the analysis and interpretation on the specific content of the civil-law-interpretation-models.I will collate the civil-law-interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China in accordance with modern civil law's mode as five series including general principle,creditor's rights, property,kinship and inheritance.Basing on such work,I will analyze the specific content.Third,comparative method.This method was used in two aspects.One aspect is reflected in the analyzing process of the content of the civil-law-interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China based on classification,which mainly refers to the solutions'comparison between the civil-law-interpretation-models in early Republic of China and the traditional civil laws.The other aspect is applied to the discussion of the current judicial interpretation's work in China,which is mainly to compare the current situation of our judicial interpretation's work with the civil-law-interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China.Fourth,the method of analysis on the logic of semantic.When we analyze the specific content of the civil-law-interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China,we are abound to be carefully studying their language environment and practical significance word by word.Fifth,the inductive method.That is mainly applied to conclude the general features basing on the analysis to the five series of the civil-law-interpretation-models.
From the analysis to the apecific content of civil-law-interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China,this paper will summarize some general characteristics,study that the Supreme Court in early Republic of China was how to deal with the conflicts between old and new laws by the civil-law-interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China and resolve the problems between natural and westearn laws in civil law's modernization's process.On the other hand,through discussing the function and significance of the civil-law-interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China and comparing the current situation of our judicial interpretation's work with it,this article will find out the current problems and get some referance to method from the civil-law-interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China.
在具体研究过程中,本文首先对民初大理院民法解释例的产生原因进行了分析,对其性质进行定位,并考察了其运作方式及风格；其次便开始对大理院民法解释例的具体内容进行剖析并总结其特点；再次发掘其功能并发现其背后的意义；最后对照我国民法近代化的过程及司法解释工作的现状进行了进一步思考,得到一些启示。
本文在研究时主要运用了以下几种方法。第一,考证的方法。本文所采用的主要资料是民初大理院有关民法方面的解释例。这些资料均为原始的第一手历史资料。对这些史料的收集、整理、解读的过程即为一个考证的过程。第二,分类的方法。该方法主要体现在对民初大理院民法解释例的分类整理和内容解读方面。笔者将民初大理院有关民法的解释例按现代民法的总则、债权、物权、亲属、承继五编分别整理并在此基础上进行内容的解读。第三,比较的方法。该方法一是运用于在分类基础上对民初大理院民法解释例的内容进行解读的过程中,主要涉及到民初解释例与传统民法解决办法的比较；二是运用于对我国当前司法解释工作借鉴意义的探讨中,主要是民初民法解释例与我国司法解释现状的比较。第四,逻辑语义的分析方法。在对民初大理院民法解释例的具体内容进行解读时,必然应字斟句酌,考察其语言环境和实际意义。第五,归纳的方法。即在对民法各编解释例进行解读的基础上,归纳出民初大理院民法解释例的总体特点。
通过对民初大理院民法解释例具体内容的解读,本文总结出大理院民法解释例的特点,考察民初大理院是如何运用解释例这一形式来处理当时的新旧民法法律冲突、解决民法近代化过程中固有法和继受法的整合问题的。另一方面,本文通过探讨民初大理院民法解释例的功能和意义,及与当今司法解释工作现状进行比较,发现目前存在的问题,并从大理院民法解释例中得到一些方法上的借鉴。
As a big transform period in Chinese history, the early Republic of China saw many kinds of contradictions and coincides such as traditional and modern,Chinese and western values' conflicts.Law and realityjustice and politics were seeking a balance in intense.In social legal system,the application between new and old laws was easily born up problems at that time,while the legislative institution congress could not carry out its function properly and could not take its responsibility well.In order to unify the guidance of justice,the highest national judicial institution----the Supreme Court,according to the demand of the times,undergone a part legislative right of congress by prejudication and interpretation model,which remedied the defect of legislation and played an important role as a regulator in practice.Therefore,the interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China had some historical significance in modern legal system's history.The interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China were produced with certain historical necessity and possibility.There was a specific mode of operation.The interpretation-models'content and function were also very rich and unique.In this paper,I will analyse the civil-law-interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China. It can enable us to study what important role the civil-law-interpretation-models played in Chinese civil law's modernization's progress.Meanwhile,it can lead us to think about our current judicial interpretation work.
In specific researching process,this paper will firstly analyse the producing causes of the civil-law-interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China,locate their nature and examinize their mode of operation and special style with it.Secondly,this paper will begin to analyze the specific content of the civil-law-interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China so that we can summarize their characteristics. Thirdly,the paper will explore the civil-law-interpretation-models'function and find the meanings behind it.Finally,I will think furtherly about the process of Chinese civil law's modernization and the current situation of the judicial interpretation's work and get some inspirations.
This paper will mainly use seveal ways as follows in researching process.First,the researching method.The main source that this paper uses is the civil-law-interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China.They are all of the original first-hand hitorical information.The process of collection,collation and interpretation on these historical information shall be a researching process.Second,the method of classification.This method is mainly reflected in two aspects.One is classification and collation on the civil-law-interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China.The other is the analysis and interpretation on the specific content of the civil-law-interpretation-models.I will collate the civil-law-interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China in accordance with modern civil law's mode as five series including general principle,creditor's rights, property,kinship and inheritance.Basing on such work,I will analyze the specific content.Third,comparative method.This method was used in two aspects.One aspect is reflected in the analyzing process of the content of the civil-law-interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China based on classification,which mainly refers to the solutions'comparison between the civil-law-interpretation-models in early Republic of China and the traditional civil laws.The other aspect is applied to the discussion of the current judicial interpretation's work in China,which is mainly to compare the current situation of our judicial interpretation's work with the civil-law-interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China.Fourth,the method of analysis on the logic of semantic.When we analyze the specific content of the civil-law-interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China,we are abound to be carefully studying their language environment and practical significance word by word.Fifth,the inductive method.That is mainly applied to conclude the general features basing on the analysis to the five series of the civil-law-interpretation-models.
From the analysis to the apecific content of civil-law-interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China,this paper will summarize some general characteristics,study that the Supreme Court in early Republic of China was how to deal with the conflicts between old and new laws by the civil-law-interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China and resolve the problems between natural and westearn laws in civil law's modernization's process.On the other hand,through discussing the function and significance of the civil-law-interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China and comparing the current situation of our judicial interpretation's work with it,this article will find out the current problems and get some referance to method from the civil-law-interpretation-models made by the Supreme Court in early Republic of China.
引文
[1]谢振民．中华民国立法史[M].台北：中正书局出版社,1937.4.
[2]黄源盛.民初法律变迁与裁判(1912—1928)[M].台北：政治大学法律系,2000.76.
[3]黄源盛.民初法律变迁与裁判(1912—1928)[M].台北：政治大学法律系,2000.68.
[4]郭卫.大理院解释例全文[M]．上海：会文堂书局,1931.编辑缘起.
[5]张生.中国法律近代化论集[C].北京：中国政法大学出版社,2002.383.
[6]黄源盛.民初法律变迁与裁判(1912—1928)[M].台北：政治大学法律系,2000.37．
[7]张道强.大理院判例、解释例——民国初期的司法机关“立法”[J].三峡大学学报,2006,(7)：155.
[8]黄源盛.民初法律变迁与裁判(1912—1928)[M].台北：政治大学法律系,2000.35.
[9]张生.中国法律近代化论集[C].北京：中国政法大学出版社,2002.384.转引自[日]福泽谕吉.文明论概略[M].商务印书馆,1959.3.
[10]张晋藩.中国法律的传统与近代转型[M].北京：法律出版社,1997.235—236.
[11]张生.民国初期的大理院：最高司法机关兼行民事立法职能[J].政法论坛,1998,(6)：119.
[12]黄聖棻.大理院民事判决法源之研究(1912—1928)[D].政治大学法律学系硕士论文,2003.59.
[13][14]黄源盛.民初法律变迁与裁判(1912—1928)[M].台北：政治大学法律系,2000.32.
[15]司法部参事厅.司法例规[M].司法院秘书处,1979.221.
[16]黄源盛.民初法律变迁与裁判(1912—1928)[M].台北：政治大学法律系,2000.33.
[17]张生.中国法律近代化论集[C].北京：中国政法大学出版社,2002.394.
[18]朱勇.中国民法近代化研究[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,2006.178.转引自刘恩荣.大理院之解释与其判例研究[J].法律评论,(37)
[19]费孝通.乡土中国生育制度[M].北京：北京大学出版社,1998.37.
[20]瞿同祖.瞿同祖法学论著集[C].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1998.28.
[21]瞿同祖.瞿同祖法学论著集[C].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1998.129.
[22]朱勇.中国民法近代化研究[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,2006.43.
[23]黄源盛.民初法律变迁与裁判(1912—1928)[M].台北：政治大学法律系,2000.33.
[24]沈尔乔.现行律民事有效部分[M].杭州：大河巷事务所,1918.49.
[25]黄荣昌.最新司法法令判解分类汇要[M].上海：中华图书馆,1923.226.
[26]郭卫.大理院解释例全文[M].上海：会文堂书局,1931.285—286.
[27]郭卫.大理院解释例全文[M].上海：会文堂书局,1931.397.
[28]沈尔乔.现行律民事有效部分[M].杭州：大河巷事务所,1918.62.
[29]黄荣昌.最新司法法令判解分类汇要[M].上海：中华图书馆,1923.265.
[30]张生.中国法律近代化论集[C]．北京：中国政法大学出版社,2002.375.转引自张宏祥.近代中国通商口岸与租界[M].天津：天津人民出版社,1993.321—326,330—333.
[31]徐国栋.民法基本原则解释[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1992.142.
[32][美]庞德.法律史解释[M].曹玉堂译.北京：华夏出版社,1987.1.
[33]黄荣昌.最新司法法令判解分类汇要[M].上海：中华图书馆,1923.77.
[34]黄荣昌.最新司法法令判解分类汇要[M].上海：中华图书馆,1923.27.
[35]郑爱诹.现行律民事有效部份集解[M].上海：世界书局,1928.13.
[36]郑爱诹.现行律民事有效部份集解[M].上海：世界书局,1928.15.
[37]黄荣昌.最新司法法令判解分类汇要[M].上海：中华图书馆,1923.7.
[38][39]黄荣昌.最新司法法令判解分类汇要[M].上海：中华图书馆,1923.1.
[40]黄荣昌.最新司法法令判解分类汇要[M].上海：中华图书馆,1923.34.
[41]黄荣昌.最新司法法令判解分类汇要[M].上海：中华图书馆,1923.260.
[42]黄荣昌.最新司法法令判解分类汇要[M].上海：中华图书馆,1923.185.
[43]张生.中国法律近代化论集[C].北京：中国政法大学出版社,2002.387.
[44]黄聖棻.大理院民事判决法源之研究(1912—1928)[D].政治大学法律学系硕士论文,2003.104.
[45]尹伊君．社会变迁的法律解释·内容提要[M]：北京：商务印书馆,2003.
[46]陈金钊.司法解释的一般理论问题论要[J].南京社会科学,1992,(6)：81.
[47]高琳、汪渊智.民法司法解释的法源性初探[J].晋阳学刊,2004,(6)：105.
[48]江平.再谈制定一部开放型的民法典[J].法学时评网,2003-8-24.
[49][50]陆正明.我国司法解释的错位与矫正[D].苏州大学硕士专业学位论文,2006.24—27.
[51]季长龙.规范性司法解释的法源地位研究[D]．中国人民大学博士学位论文,2008.294-295.
[52]季长龙.规范性司法解释的法源地位研究[D].中国人民大学博士学位论文,2008.293.
[2]黄源盛.民初法律变迁与裁判(1912—1928)[M].台北：政治大学法律系,2000.76.
[3]黄源盛.民初法律变迁与裁判(1912—1928)[M].台北：政治大学法律系,2000.68.
[4]郭卫.大理院解释例全文[M]．上海：会文堂书局,1931.编辑缘起.
[5]张生.中国法律近代化论集[C].北京：中国政法大学出版社,2002.383.
[6]黄源盛.民初法律变迁与裁判(1912—1928)[M].台北：政治大学法律系,2000.37．
[7]张道强.大理院判例、解释例——民国初期的司法机关“立法”[J].三峡大学学报,2006,(7)：155.
[8]黄源盛.民初法律变迁与裁判(1912—1928)[M].台北：政治大学法律系,2000.35.
[9]张生.中国法律近代化论集[C].北京：中国政法大学出版社,2002.384.转引自[日]福泽谕吉.文明论概略[M].商务印书馆,1959.3.
[10]张晋藩.中国法律的传统与近代转型[M].北京：法律出版社,1997.235—236.
[11]张生.民国初期的大理院：最高司法机关兼行民事立法职能[J].政法论坛,1998,(6)：119.
[12]黄聖棻.大理院民事判决法源之研究(1912—1928)[D].政治大学法律学系硕士论文,2003.59.
[13][14]黄源盛.民初法律变迁与裁判(1912—1928)[M].台北：政治大学法律系,2000.32.
[15]司法部参事厅.司法例规[M].司法院秘书处,1979.221.
[16]黄源盛.民初法律变迁与裁判(1912—1928)[M].台北：政治大学法律系,2000.33.
[17]张生.中国法律近代化论集[C].北京：中国政法大学出版社,2002.394.
[18]朱勇.中国民法近代化研究[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,2006.178.转引自刘恩荣.大理院之解释与其判例研究[J].法律评论,(37)
[19]费孝通.乡土中国生育制度[M].北京：北京大学出版社,1998.37.
[20]瞿同祖.瞿同祖法学论著集[C].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1998.28.
[21]瞿同祖.瞿同祖法学论著集[C].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1998.129.
[22]朱勇.中国民法近代化研究[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,2006.43.
[23]黄源盛.民初法律变迁与裁判(1912—1928)[M].台北：政治大学法律系,2000.33.
[24]沈尔乔.现行律民事有效部分[M].杭州：大河巷事务所,1918.49.
[25]黄荣昌.最新司法法令判解分类汇要[M].上海：中华图书馆,1923.226.
[26]郭卫.大理院解释例全文[M].上海：会文堂书局,1931.285—286.
[27]郭卫.大理院解释例全文[M].上海：会文堂书局,1931.397.
[28]沈尔乔.现行律民事有效部分[M].杭州：大河巷事务所,1918.62.
[29]黄荣昌.最新司法法令判解分类汇要[M].上海：中华图书馆,1923.265.
[30]张生.中国法律近代化论集[C]．北京：中国政法大学出版社,2002.375.转引自张宏祥.近代中国通商口岸与租界[M].天津：天津人民出版社,1993.321—326,330—333.
[31]徐国栋.民法基本原则解释[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1992.142.
[32][美]庞德.法律史解释[M].曹玉堂译.北京：华夏出版社,1987.1.
[33]黄荣昌.最新司法法令判解分类汇要[M].上海：中华图书馆,1923.77.
[34]黄荣昌.最新司法法令判解分类汇要[M].上海：中华图书馆,1923.27.
[35]郑爱诹.现行律民事有效部份集解[M].上海：世界书局,1928.13.
[36]郑爱诹.现行律民事有效部份集解[M].上海：世界书局,1928.15.
[37]黄荣昌.最新司法法令判解分类汇要[M].上海：中华图书馆,1923.7.
[38][39]黄荣昌.最新司法法令判解分类汇要[M].上海：中华图书馆,1923.1.
[40]黄荣昌.最新司法法令判解分类汇要[M].上海：中华图书馆,1923.34.
[41]黄荣昌.最新司法法令判解分类汇要[M].上海：中华图书馆,1923.260.
[42]黄荣昌.最新司法法令判解分类汇要[M].上海：中华图书馆,1923.185.
[43]张生.中国法律近代化论集[C].北京：中国政法大学出版社,2002.387.
[44]黄聖棻.大理院民事判决法源之研究(1912—1928)[D].政治大学法律学系硕士论文,2003.104.
[45]尹伊君．社会变迁的法律解释·内容提要[M]：北京：商务印书馆,2003.
[46]陈金钊.司法解释的一般理论问题论要[J].南京社会科学,1992,(6)：81.
[47]高琳、汪渊智.民法司法解释的法源性初探[J].晋阳学刊,2004,(6)：105.
[48]江平.再谈制定一部开放型的民法典[J].法学时评网,2003-8-24.
[49][50]陆正明.我国司法解释的错位与矫正[D].苏州大学硕士专业学位论文,2006.24—27.
[51]季长龙.规范性司法解释的法源地位研究[D]．中国人民大学博士学位论文,2008.294-295.
[52]季长龙.规范性司法解释的法源地位研究[D].中国人民大学博士学位论文,2008.293.