公平原则在司法裁判中的适用——基于典型案例的研究

The Application of the Principle of Fairness in Judicial Decisions—A Study Based on Typical Cases

摘要: 随着我国法治建设的不断加强，《民法典》的颁布与施行，民法在调整社会生活中各种民事法律关系，维系社会稳定的作用范围不断扩大，民法基本原则作为民法最基本的价值取向，对民法作用发挥具有重要意义。其中，公平原则作为民法的基本原则之一，在《民法典》总则编中明确规定了民事主体从事民事活动应当遵循公平原则的原则性条款，以及在各编中的具体条款中也有所体现。同时民法也要求在司法裁判中也应符合公平原则的价值追求。但在司法审判阶段，公平原则这一基本原则并非像法律规则可以直接适用，需要满足特定条件下才可适用。并且当裁判中以公平原则作为指引和论证理由时，应体现为实体公平还是程序公平的问题仍需进一步明确。本文通过对黄仲华诉刘三明债权人撤销权纠纷这一典型案例的争议焦点进行分析，探讨司法领域的公平原则的适用条件以及实体与程序公平的选择。

Abstract: With the continuous strengthening of the construction of the rule of law in China and the promulgation and implementation of the Civil Code, the scope of the role of the civil law in adjusting all kinds of civil legal relations in social life and maintaining social stability has been expanding, and the basic principles of the civil law, as the most basic values of the civil law, are of great significance in the play of the civil law. Among them, the principle of fairness, as one of the basic principles of civil law, is clearly stipulated in the General Provisions of the Civil Code, which stipulates the principle that civil subjects should follow the principle of fairness in engaging in civil activities, as well as being reflected in the specific provisions of each part of the Civil Code. At the same time, the Civil Law also requires that judicial decisions should also comply with the value of the principle of fairness. However, in the judicial stage, the principle of fairness, the basic principle is not like a legal rule can be applied directly, need to meet the specific conditions can be applied. And when the decision to the principle of fairness as a guide and argumentation, should be embodied in the entity fair or procedural fairness of the problem still need to be further clarified. This article analyzes the focus of dispute in the typical case of Huang Zhonghua v. Liu Sanming Creditor’s Right of Avoidance Dispute, and discusses the conditions for the application of the principle of fairness in the judicial field and the choice between substantive and procedural fairness.