论文部分内容阅读
目前国际私法中的法律规避正处于两难境地国际私法对法律规避的解读是很难有说服力的。传统理论直接把法律规避设定为欺诈,逃法的行为。由于大部分学者对法律规避都持有“部分有效说”的态度,也就是他们也认同法律规避存在有效的情况,但是他们这样的观点又违背了法律上对于违法的行为一致无效的铁论,因此对法律行为的效力该如何解读便进入了一个两难的境地。由此可以看出讨论国际私法上的法律规避的效力问题,便显得尤为重要。但其实,对法律规避的效力正确的解读应该是,法律规避的行为是存在于合法行为与违法行为之间的,它并不属于所谓的违法行为,所以我持有的观点就是国际私法上的法律规避是有效力的。
At present, the legal avoidance in the private international law is in a dilemma. The interpretation of the legal avoidance by the private international law is difficult to be convincing. The traditional theory directly sets the legal avoidance as fraud and escape law. Since most scholars hold the attitude of “partial effective” for legal evasion, that is, they also agree that the law circumvents the existence of valid conditions, but their view is contrary to the law that the law is unjustly invalid for acts of infringement Therefore, it is a dilemma to interpret the effectiveness of legal acts. From this we can see that it is particularly important to discuss the effectiveness of legal avoidance in private international law. However, in fact, the correct interpretation of the validity of legal avoidance should be that the act of legal avoidance exists between the legal act and the illegal act. It does not belong to the so-called illegal act. Therefore, I hold the view that private international law Legal evasion is effective.