尋找“更有利的法”：比較型衝突規範的司法困境及出路

In Search of the Better Law: Judicial Evading of Comparative Rules of Conflict of Law and Its Remedy

2011年，中國《涉外民事關係法律適用法》引入了“有利條款”。六年多來，這種比較型衝突規範因其迥異的適用邏輯和比較法氣質，在實踐中遭遇了司法規避，至今未見嚴格準確適用“有利條款”的司法案例。司法困境的原因何在？走出困境只能仰賴立法修改乃至廢除“有利條款”嗎？通過對“有利條款”的歷史溯源和實踐中的裁判邏輯進行分析，可以發現司法困境既存在立法論根源，又存在司法技術闕如的問題。通過對現有案例進行法教義學梳理和分析，再通過設計和評析虛擬案例的方法，可以發現，在司法實踐中準確適用“有利條款”具有可行性，並不存在實質性的障礙，至少能在個案層面上建立清晰、具有可操作性的裁判規則。法官不應以司法規避放棄裁判的職責。尋找“更有利的法”，就是尋找更睿智的法官。在司法實踐中積極適用“有利原則”具有重要的理論價值，有助於從中觀層面上發展比較法理論。在中國深化對外開放和建設“一帶一路”的背景下，同樣別具實踐價值。

In 2011, China introduced 'the favorable clauses' in the Law of the People's Republic of China on Application of Laws for Foreign-Related Civil Relationships. Since then, for more than six years, 'the favorable clauses' have encountered judicial evasion in practice because of its unique logic of application and comparative law temperament. By now, there is no strict and accurate application of 'the favorable clause' in judicial cases. How shall we explain the judicial refusal of applying such legal rules? Shall the only way out of this predicament depend on legislative changes and even the repeal of 'the favorable clauses'? Looking into the history of 'the favorable clauses' and the logic of adjudication in practice, both legislative and judicial factors can be found. Through review and analysis of existing cases, and by the method of designing and analyzing a virtual case, it comes to the conclusion that there is no essential obstacle to apply 'the favorable clauses' in individual cases. Judges should not seek to evade the duties of adjudication. Searching for the better law means to search for the more intelligent and responsible judges. Actively applying 'the favorable clauses' contributes both to the development of comparative legal theory, and to the improvement of judicial capacity in handling foreign-related cases, which is of special value in the background of China's deepening open policy and promoting the Belt and Road Initiative.