The misinterpretations of the rule for ordinary chattel multiple sales have continued for several years. And academia thinks that the rule violates the compulsive requirements of civil law system. As an equitable rule, the rule retains deep ties with litigation procedure, bound to be separated moderately from civil substantive law. And it is not appropriate to interfere into the special realm or to carry out academic evaluation by means of the systematical compulsiveness of civil law. The condition, in which the equitable rule links litigation deeply, makes it necessary that the observation of autonomy of the seller should be executed within diachronic structure of litigation. In its specific micro environment of litigation, to accord with the compulsiveness of procedural law that the judge should not refuse judgment and the intrinsic demand to keep unification of judgment and legal system, the rule should be regarded as a necessary choice even though as an external form of judicial practical reason, it expels the equality of credit.%对普通动产多重买卖规则的误读已经持续多年,学术界普遍认为它违反了民法体系强制的要求.普通动产多重买卖规则作为一种与诉讼程序有着深度勾连的"个案调处规范",与民事实体法应当适度分离,民法体系强制不应介入这一特殊界域,对它的学术评价也不应借助于民法体系强制的要求.这一"个案调处规范"所处的与程序深度勾连的环境,使得对出卖人自主决定权的观察只能在程序的历时结构中展开;在其具体的微环境中,不得拒绝裁判的程序法上的强制与必须维系裁判与法制统一的内在要求,使得作为司法实践理性外在形式的、排除债权平等性的普通动产多重买卖规则成为必然之选.
展开▼
