无效法律行为之探讨——海峡两岸相关概念之比较

在民法上,“法律行为”向为建立法律关系之基础,亦为民法体系中之重要核心。中国大陆民法总则编建议稿有关“法律行为”之规定,亦为民法核心之一,且其规范之条文,系重要民法立法。而“法律行为”可谓已成为任何一种民法之基础。法律行为之存在,在某些情状下仍有可能衍生“无效”之问题。在我国台湾地区,法律行为之无效,系指按照法律之一定条件,对于已成立之法律行为进行评价后,所得之否定性结论。然而,我国台湾地区民法第一百一十三条与现行制度,例如不当得利、物上请求权或第二百四十七条之给付不能、第九百七十九条之1订婚赠与物之返还等,规范上明显冲突。该民法第113条为大陆民法所无,故有就海峡两岸相关概念加以比较之必要。

A Discussion of Invalid Legal Act --Comparison of the Related Concepts in Chinese Mainland and Taiwan

In civil law,＂ legal act＂ is the foundation of establishing legal relationship, and it is also the important core in the civil law system. In recommendations of Chinese Mainland general provisions of civil law, the prescriptions concerning ＂legal act＂ is also one core of civil law, and the specifications are important legislations of civil law. ＂Legal act＂ has already become the foundation of any civil law. The existence of legal act, under certain circumstances, may still derive problems of ＂invalid＂. In Taiwan, invalid legal act means the negative conclusion after the evaluation for the established legal behavior in accordance with certain conditions of the laws. In the civil law of Taiwan, however, article 113 is apparently conflicted with the specifications of the current system, such as unjust benefit, the right of real claim, or impossibility of performance in article 247, the return of the engagement gifts in the first item of article 979. Article 113 of Taiwan civil law is not included in the civil law of Chinese Mainland ,for which it is necessary to have a comparison of the related concepts in Chinese Mainland and Taiwan.