On The Rationality Of Malicious Collusion Norms

General Principles of Civil Law stipulates that civil acts of malicious collusion that damage the interests of the state,the collective or the third party are invalid.As one of the invalid cases of civil acts,it is not uncommon to discuss the preservation or abolition of malicious collusion norms.The existence of malicious collusion norms seems unreasonable due to the ambiguity of the connotation of malicious collusion,the ambiguity of the subject of malicious collusion,the ambiguity of the boundaries between malicious collusion and other legal systems,and the uncertainty of whether malicious collusion norms can be regarded as an independent provision leading to invalidity of civil acts.However,in order to regulate the illegality of malicious collusion,the General Principles of Civil Law uniformly prescribes civil juristic acts,and defines malicious collusion as an independent provision leading to the invalidity of civil juristic acts.Nevertheless,the connotation,logical structure and legal effect of malicious collusion should be further clarified.The new law also stipulates that false declaration of will is one of the invalid norms of civil legal acts while stipulating the norms of malicious collusion.Prior to this,malicious collusion was criticized for its confused relationship with false intention.It is even believed that conspiracy and hypocrisy can cover malicious collusion.In fact,malicious collusion and false representation do have similarities.Because there is no legislation similar to malicious collusion norm in comparative law,only the provision of conspiracy hypocrisy,coupled with the existing problems of malicious collusion norm itself,many scholars believe that the new law should only provide for conspiracy hypocrisy.So it is very important to clarify the relationship between false intention and malicious collusion,and to make clear that malicious collusion and false intention can not be substituted for each other.It is particularly important for the rationality of malicious collusion norms.Malicious collusion norm has its own system orientation,which can be reasonably integrated into the current civil legal act effectiveness system.Malicious collusion norm is not only a case of invalid norm of civil legal acts,but also a special case of deviant acts,which has a reasonable system foundation.The new law also provides for the malicious collusion between the agent and the counterpart.However,this provision is not simply an act of abuse of agency in theory.It should exist as a special case of malicious collusion.Compared with the specific situation of malicious collusion,the malicious collusion norm in the General Principles of Civil Law has the function of regulating the general norm of malicious collusion.In addition to the case of malicious collusion between agents and counterparts,there are also provisions on the regulation of malicious collusion in other laws of our country.These provisions should be based on whether they conform to the constitution of civil legal acts to determine whether they are special types of malicious collusion.Although there is no doubt about the rationality of malicious collusion norm in theory,the application of malicious collusion norm in judicial practice is unsatisfactory.Confirmation of malicious collusion often occurs in disputes over the validity of contracts.For the validity of other civil legal acts,malicious collusion norms can not play their due role.This is related to the standard of proof of malicious collusion,as well as the legislative concept and judicial concept of controlling the application of malicious collusion norms.