论文部分内容阅读
无论是英美法系还是大陆法系的国家几乎无一例外的都将重婚作为了婚姻无效的一种情形,我国也是如此。《婚姻法》第十条规定了婚姻无效的四种情形,但在《婚姻法司法解释(一)》的第八条又做出规定:当事人依据婚姻法第十条规定向人民法院申请宣告无效的,申请时,法定的无效婚姻情形已经消失的,人民法院不予支持。值得注意的是,在第八条中并未出现但书的规定,也就是说,原则上四种无效情形消失后无效婚姻都可被治愈,即无效婚姻转化为有效。但在司法实践中,往往认为重婚是严重违背《婚姻法》立法精神和公序良俗的,是严重损害一夫一妻制,甚至触犯刑法的行为。因此即使重婚的无效情形消失也不可使婚姻自动转化为有效。可无论是从法规解释,还是婚姻自由,人权保障以及适用性和可行性的角度来看,这种做法又都是极为不妥的。
Almost without exception, both Anglo-American law and civil law countries regard bigamy as a circumstance of invalid marriage, as is our country. Article 10 of the Marriage Law provides for four situations in which marriage is invalid but stipulates in Article 8 of the Judicial Interpretation of Marriage Law (I) that if the party applies to the people’s court for invalidation pursuant to Article 10 of the Marriage Law, the application When the statutory null and void marriage has disappeared, the people’s court will not support it. It is noteworthy that in the eighth article does not appear in the proviso, that is to say, in principle, the disappearance of four invalid cases invalid marriage can be cured, that invalid marriage into effective. However, in judicial practice, bigamy is often considered to be a serious violation of the legislative spirit and public order and good customs of the Marriage Law. It is a act that seriously damages monogamy and even violates the criminal law. Therefore, the disappearance of the bigamy’s ineffectiveness does not automatically translate the marriage into an effective one. Whether from the statutory interpretation, freedom of marriage, protection of human rights, and the applicability and feasibility of the point of view, this approach is extremely inappropriate.