论文部分内容阅读
对王凤霞等上诉案法院判决的学术批评,揭开了错误规则德国民法传统上的二元论与罗马—法国法、日本法民法传统上的一元论论争的序幕。必须指出,一元论学者的批判存在罗马法文献考证不规范以及论证不严谨的弊病,以此为契机建构的一元论学术大厦,不仅基础概念的界定根基不牢,建构于其上的民法错误规则也摇摇欲坠,且在实际上解构了其基础概念。应承认身份关系领域,尤其是婚姻、遗嘱、监护、收养领域内错误规则的特殊性,建构一个区分身份关系领域与合同领域的民法上的法律错误概念分类与区分规则体系。合同领域的法律错误规则应坚持德国民法传统上二元论,厘定“法律”为任意法规范,区分建构法律上的内容错误与动机错误的不同撤销权机制。
The academic criticism of court decisions such as Wang Fengxia opened the curtain on the erroneous rule that traditional dualism in German civil law competed with the traditional monism on Roman-French law and Japanese civil law. It must be pointed out that the monistic scholars’ criticism has some problems such as the non-standard textual research of the Roman law and the ill-reasoned argument. The monistic academic building constructed on the basis of this not only lacks a firm foundation for the definition of the basic concepts but also falts , And actually deconstruct its basic concepts. We should recognize the particularity of error rules in the field of identity relations, especially in the fields of marriage, will, guardianship and adoption, and construct a system of conceptual classification and differentiation of law errors in the area of identity and contract. The law error rule in the field of contract should insist on the traditional dualism of German civil law and determine “law ” as the arbitrariness and the different revocation mechanism which constructs the legal content error and motivation error.