摘要
《民法典》没有规定婚约,但在理论上和实践中,婚约却是后续彩礼返还、费用偿还乃至损害赔偿问题的逻辑起点。唯有正视婚约的民法意义,方可在逻辑融洽的规则体系中应对和解决上述问题。婚姻自由原则对婚约制度的构建起到基础性作用。婚约不可诉请履行,其既非预约,也非本约,违反婚约也不导致结婚的缔约过失责任,但婚约构成包括彩礼在内一系列后续无偿财产给付的原因。应当用婚约财产的概念统摄彩礼以及其他基于婚约无偿给付的财产。在违反婚约的情形下,婚约财产应当适用给付目的不达的不当得利进行返还。婚约当事人基于婚约所付出费用的偿还本质上不属于婚约财产返还问题,而是损害赔偿问题。从解释论上看,该费用在现行法下无法得到赔偿。在法政策层面,应当基于公平原则,在不会形成“结婚强制”的前提下对因信赖婚约而为合理支出的一方适当补偿。
China does not provide for explicit regulations on the issue of marriage pro-posal in the Civil Code,but only stipulates the returm of betrothal gifls in judicial interpreta-tions.The avoidance of marriage proposal in positive law is due to the historical reason of oppo-sing old customs after the founding of the People's Republic of China.Subsequent theories have mostly attempted to construct a marriage proposal system within the framework of contract law,forming three different theories:the main contract theory,the preliminary contract theory,and the theory of liability for pre-contractual fault.However,all these three theories have the defect of violating the principle of marriage freedom.The basie logic by which the principle of marriage freedom afetse the construction of the marriage proposal system is that it is the right of each individual to refuse to enter into a marriage they do not desire.The law does not impose a"marriage obligation"on the parties due to a marriage proposal,and the violation of a marriage proposal does not constitute a civil law violation and thus the violator cannot be held accounta-ble.Therefore,the basic position of the negation theory should be maintained,that is,a mar-riage proposal constitutes not a legally binding contract in civil law but rather a natural agree-ment on the parties’intentions.A party to a marriage proposal cannot sue for marriage based on the marriage proposal.China should weaken the concept of betrothal gifts in legal terms and re-turn to the upper-level concept of"marriage proposal property",which encompasses all proper-ty given without compensation due to a marriage proposal.Thus,both betrothal gifts given ac-cording to customs and habis and other gifts given by a party after reaching a marriage proposal due to trust in the marriage but not lasified as betrothal gifts can be covered by a unified re-tur rule.Courts no longer need to address the isue of returming large amounts of property given before marriage through the concept of"conditional gif".Both betrothal gifis and other gifs given based on a marriage proposal are of the nature of purposeful gifs.Due to the particularity of gratuitous legal acts,"purpose"can exeptionally afet the validity of the gift contract,thereby leading to the return of unjust enrichment when the purpose is not achieved.Regarding damages,it should be made clear that all damages based on"fault"are incompatible with the principle of marriage freedom,and the application of the principle of full compensation also po-ses a threat to marriage freedom.Therefore,fair liability is the only feasible solution.Courts should,under the precondition of not imposing substantial restrictions on marriage freedom,de-termine whether compensation is necessary and the amount of compensation based on the specif-ic circumstances of each case,taking into account factors such as the reasons for the dissolution of the marriage proposal,the property status of the parties,the destination and reasonableness of the expenses,etc.
出处
《环球法律评论》
北大核心
2025年第1期87-104,共18页
Global Law Review
基金
2024年度教育部人文社会科学研究青年基金项目“内容、动机二元结构视角下法律行为动机规制体系研究”(24YJC820056)的研究成果。
