Research On The Application Of The Expression Rule Of Collusion And Hypocrisy

Social development has entered a new era,and legal issues are becoming increasingly complex in practice.And the expression of collusion and hypocrisy in the civil field are becoming more and more common in social life.But the law does not provide relevant regulations on this.A certain period of legal blanks has caused many social contradictions and obstacles in judicial practice.The first paragraph of Article 146 of the 2017 "General Principles of the Civil Law" provides for our hypocritical expression,which has achieved a breakthrough of "from 0 to 1".However,there are still some problems in the application of this regulation that require continuous improvement..The first part of this article elaborates the relevant theories of the expression of collusion and hypocrisy,including the theoretical connotation of complicity in false expression,namely intuitive theoretical definition,theoretical basis such as the autonomy of will and the principle of protection of trust interests,as well as the analysis of the current legislative status of collusion false expression,to understand the actual situation and shortcomings of the rule in the legal provisions lead to the shortcomings of the rule in the practical case application below.The second part is mainly to study the application of collusion and hypocrisy in individual cases.Firstly,by summarizing and sorting out 151 cases of contract disputes,such as CICC Property Rights Exchange and the Oriental College of Heilongjiang Province.It was found that cases of false representations of collusion in practice can be divided into two main categories,including contracts that were not actually performed.As well as the actual performed contract,the actual performed contract mainly includes three types of yin and yang contracts,the name buying and selling is actually other,and completely fictitious certain behaviors.Looking at the classification of the manifestation of the common false expression rules,it can be seen that in practical application,it is found that the act of conspiracy and hypocrisy is not fully controlled within the scope of the expression of intent.Secondly,through the analysis of practice,we can understand the problem of the differences in the identification of hidden behaviors in the application of this rule.Thirdly,through the analysis of cases such as Sun Wei,Kong Junsheng,etc.and Liu Ruiyun’s creditor’s revocation dispute,Wu yi Market of Heng yang Real Estate Development Company Limited.And Peng Xiaohua’s housing ownership confirmation disputes,etc.It is recognized that the rules are in collusion with malicious intentions and cover up illegal purposes in legal forms.The difference between similar rules such as assignment and guarantee,clarify the boundaries between them,and understand the constituent elements and conditions for the application of the rules.Fourthly,the law does not provide for the effectiveness of third parties regarding collusion and hypocrisy.The article analyzes and sorts out practical cases and finds that there are differences in the scope of identification of third parties in practical cases,differences in determination of effectiveness,and goodwill.Obtain the problem of system mixing.Fifthly,the connection with the evidence procedure also hinders the perfect application of this rule.To sum up,in this section,by sorting out and analyzing the above five aspects,it is found that in the practical application of the collusive false expression rule.From the perspective of the rule itself and external factors,find that there are mainly inconsistencies in the identification of external performance behavior,and the application boundary between the rule and similar rules is not uniform.The inconsistency of judgments on the effectiveness of clearing and third parties,as well as difficulties in producing evidence and unclear standards in judicial practice.Finally,in view of the main problems in the application of the collusion false expression rule obtained through the analysis of the actual cases in judicial practice in the previous part,combined with the advanced experience of the application of the collusion false expression rule abroad,legal thoughts and suggestions are put forward.Including: firstly,strictly regulate the scope of application of the rules of collusion and false expression,and strictly control it within the scope of expression of intention;secondly,clarify the definition of hidden behavior;thirdly,clarify its application limit with other similar systems and the conditions;fourthly,improve the regulations for third parties,distinguish the system from the system of good faith acquisition in the field of civil law,and improve the protection of meritorious third parties;fifthly,establish a “combination with evidence procedures” System,learn from the use of inversion rules,and build a unified certification standard.Through the above,it is expected to promote the improvement of the collusive behavior expression system to a certain extent and promote its better function.