我国与苏联有关法律行为是否具有合法性之论述，多数均将法律行为的合法与生效混为一谈。实际上，法律行为的成立并不以违法性为判断基准；法律行为是在成立要件中判断其是否成立，于生效要件中才判断其是否生效；法律行为经常与合法与否没有直接关系，“适法”比“合法”更能准确体现出法律行为的本质。《苏联民法》继受自《德国民法》，但缘于意识形态与计划经济的需要，苏联以国家意志取代了通过意思表示所形成的私法自治，因此认为合法行为才是法律行为。我国的《民法通则》以“民事行为”与“民事法律行为”代替了“法律行为”，此规定与理论难以自洽，在实践上产生许多变形，一直不乏学者批评。确认无效法律行为（民事行为）得以撤销，对法律行为的中立性与适法性等特质，有辅助厘清的效果。未来民法总则中有关法律行为的规定，将决定我们国家与民族的生活方式，法律人应为此奋斗。%The argument of whether it is legitimate or not in related law in our country and in Rus⁃sia confuses legitimacy of legal behavior with its effectiveness. In fact, the establishment of legal be⁃havior is not based on illegitimacy; it lies in the element to judge its legitimacy and the effective el⁃ement decides its effectiveness; there is no relation between legal behavior and its legitimacy and“ef⁃fectiveness”reveals more the nature of legal behavior than“legitimacy”. Russian Civil Law inherits that of Germany and due to ideological and economic need, Russia replaces self governing of private law with state will and regards legal behavior as behavior abiding the law. Our General Provisions of Civil Law replaces“behavior abiding the law”with“civil behavior”and“civil law behavior”, which is not suitable, leads to many transformation in practice and is criticized by scholars. It is illuminat⁃ing to delete ineffective legal behavior (civil behavior) and define neutrality and suitability of legal behavior. Future regulation of legal behavior in General Provisions of Civil Law will decide way of life of this country and this nation and legalists should work for it.
展开▼
