The provisions of General Principles of Civil Code on the effective elements of juristic act include both the positive and general provisions of Article 143,and the negative list provisions of Article 144 to 154. Under the current rules of distribution of burden of proof,the literal interpretation of the norm of Article 143 is the template for the establishment of rights,and the 144th to the 154th the templates for rights barrier.In ju-dicial practice,if the right of Article 143 to establish normative interpretation will lead to legal action,the bur-den of proof can be assigned to the advocates of the effective party,sometimes assigned to the claims of invalid party,and the distribution of the burden of proof is not uniform.Moreover,there is no correspondence between the application of the law and the distribution of the burden of proof of the law.In order to be consistent with the attack principle,probability principle,proximity principle of the theory of allocation of the burden,and be consistent with the principle of autonomy of will and the principle of encouraging trade,Article 143 should be interpreted as rights barrier norm in terms of system,purpose and comparative law.In this way,we can solve the practical difficulties and make Article 143 consistent with the effective presumption rules of Article 136 of the provisions of General Principles of Civil Code,and the international norm that takes the effective elements of the legal act as rights barrier.%《民法总则》关于法律行为有效要件的规定既包括第143条的正面概括性规定,又包括第144条至第154条的反面列举式规定.在我国现行证明责任分配规则下,第143条法规范类型的文义解释为权利成立规范,第144条至第154条为权利障碍规范.在实践中,第143条的权利成立规范解释将导致法律行为效力的证明责任有时被分配给主张有效一方,有时被分配给主张无效一方,证明责任分配不统一.并且,法官适用的法条与该法条的证明责任分配也未一一对应.为了与证明责任分配理论之进攻者原则、盖然性原则、邻近原则相符,同时与意思自治和鼓励交易原则相符,应按照体系解释、目的解释、比较法解释等将第143条解释为权利障碍规范.如此,方能解决上述实践困境,使第143条与《民法总则》第136条的有效推定规则对接,并与国际上把法律行为有效要件作为权利障碍要件的通行做法接轨.
展开▼
