优先权的立法定位

我国正在起草的《物权法》中,对于基于维护社会公益和社会正义的目的,需要赋予优先受偿效力的某些特种债权是否应当作为一项独立的法定担保物权制度在《物权法》中加以规定,学界有着不同的观点。本文通过对大陆法系法、日和德、瑞等国在此问题上的不同观点和立法例的比较分析,提出我国未来立法不应采用法、日的立法例,将特种债权作为法定担保物权看待,而应将之作为债权效力的例外来处理。因此在立法模式上,赋予特种债权以优先受偿的效力,不应通过在《物权法》中增设新的担保物权种类来达到,而应通过完善我国现行《民事诉讼法》中的债权清偿程序、执行程序、破产偿债程序和《企业破产法》中的破产清算程序来实现。

The Legislative Classification of Priority

In order tosafeguard the public good and social justice,some special creditor's rights need to be given priority.At present,when our nation has been drafting the Law on real right,scholars have divided on the issue whether these special creditor's rights should be stipulated in the Law on real right as an independent right of secured interest. On the basis of comparison and contrast of different viewpoints and legislation in the civil law countries such as French, Japanese, Germany and Switzerland, this article brings forward the standpoint that we should regard special creditor's right as the exception of effectiveness of creditor's rights rather than the statutory right of secured interest, the latter is the way adopted by French and Japanese. Thus, in the legislative mode, we cannot give priority to specical creditor's rights by adding up new secured interest in the Law on real right, but by consummating the related provisions in the Code of Civil Procedure and Bankruptcy Law, for instance, discharge of debt,execution,bankruptcy liquidation and so on.