重大誤解的範式之變──從錯誤論到歸責論

我國《民法典》第147條與相關司法解釋未對重大誤解的構成提出實質標準。傳統民法理論中的“錯誤論”在價值判斷上面臨交易安全與決定自由保護不足的雙重困境，導致了教義學上不必要的複雜和不確定，難以為我國法提供解釋指引。以締約過失廢止合同為代表的“歸責論”打破了“動機錯誤不受關注”的教條，轉而對相對方在錯誤形成中的作用進行規範評價，體系化地吸納了先合同誠信關係的價值變遷。基於歸責論的解釋思路，相對方過失導致或維持的錯誤具有可撤銷性；雙方均無過失的共同錯誤不應允許一方通過撤銷合同轉嫁全部風險；作為歸責論的例外，當錯誤造成重大損失時也可允許錯誤方撤銷，從而形成以相對方過失為原則，以錯誤方重大損失為例外的實質標準。

Article 147 of the PRC Civil Code and the corresponding judicial interpretation do not provide substantive criteria for the formation of gross misunderstanding. The traditional theory of mistake in the continental law systems faces dual dilemmas of lacking transaction security and the insufficient protection of the freedom of decision- making, which leads to the unnecessary complexity and uncertainty in theory and is incapable of providing guidance for the interpretation of Chinese law. The theory of imputation, represented by the avoidance of contract on the basis of cul pa in contrahendo, breaks the dogma that “the motivation mistake is irrevocable” and instead legally evaluates the counter-party’s impact in the composition of mistake, systematically absorbing the value of pre-contractual good faith. Based on the theory of imputation, the mistake caused or kept by the counter-party’s negligent misrepresentation or non-disclosure is revocable. The common mistake in which neither party is at fault shall not be revoked to transfer the entire risk. As an exception to the theory of imputation, the mistaking party is allowed to revoke the contract if there are heavy economic losses caused by mistake. Therefore, a substantial criterion based on the principle of counter-party’s negligence and the exception of heavy economic loss can be established.