The Judicial Application Of The Legal Rule On Malicious Collusion

The legal theory community has been controversial about the rules of invalidatio n of contracts caused by malicious channeling,and there are also various chaos in judi cial application.In view of this,this article conducts research on the judicial applicati on of this rule.In accordance with the article structure of Article 154 of the Civil Code,the author designed the article structure of this article to form an article style: "perpetrator and counterpart"-"malicious collusion"-"damage to the legitimate rights and interests of others"-"invalid",Focusing on analyzing the constituent elements of the rule of invalidity caused by malicious collusion through judicial cases,and discovering the problems in the judicial application of the rule.When analyzing the constituent elements of the rules,it is clear that the meaning of "perpetrator and counterparty" is to make a statement of intent and form a consensual civil legal act.The meaning expressed by the actor and the counterparty is true.The civil legal act of malicious collusion has caused actual harm to the legal rights and interests of others,and it is believed that the "legitimate rights of others" refers to the rights and legitimate interests of specific third parties other than the subject of malicious collusion of civil legal acts,and is limited to property rights and interests.Social public interest is excluded.Regarding the effectiveness of malicious collusion in civil legal acts,this article takes the view of relative inefficiency from the perspective of private autonomy.Regarding the legal consequences of malicious collusion of civil legal acts that are relatively invalid,this article believes that,in judicial practice,the content of property return and fault liability is generally applicable,which is an error in the application of law.This error should be corrected.The correct legal basis is the provisions of Article 157 of the "Civil Code" that "if the law provides otherwise,in accordance with its provisions",according to the different circumstances of the case,different legal basis applies,causing different legal consequences.This article analyzes the contents of Article 154 of the Civil Code one by one,and actively responds to the doubts raised by the academic circles on the judicial application of this rule.Regarding the academic community’s view that it is difficult to realize the burden of proof of the rule of malicious collusion,and that the judicial application violates the higher statutory proof standard of "beyond reasonable doubt",this article opposes that the malicious collusion between the perpetrator and the counterparty is necessary presumption of facts through related facts,the parties bear the burden of proof for the related facts,and judges use the presumption of facts to determine whether there is malicious collusion.There is no difficulty in producing evidence or that judicial application violates the legal standard of proof.The parties do not bear the burden of proof for the implementation of the judge’s presumption.Therefore,the standard of proof does not actually play a role in the judge’s presumption of malicious collusion,and there is no problem of violating the standard.Finally,this article distinguishes the constituent elements and scope of application of the rule of malicious collusion to invalidate the contract from other related rules,explains the independent normative significance and judicial application value of the rule,and responds to the academic community’s proposal that the rule of malicious collusion to invalidate the contract can be replaced by other rules.It also clarifies the boundaries of judicial application,and puts forward opinions and methods on the chaotic status of judicial application.