论文部分内容阅读
侵权债权人在破产程序中被置于普通债权人的受偿地位可能导致事实和法律上的不公平,然而多数国家都在破产立法中肯定了这种受偿地位安排。探究该制度背后的立法原因。主要有替代制度另行救济论、经济效益优先原则的必然代价论以及立法滞后论。这些立法原因有的值得肯定,如另行救济论中的经营者连带责任制度、剩余债务免除例外制度;有的应受质疑,如另行救济论中的责任保险和基金制度以及代价论。我国在经营者连带责任制度缺失的情况下,应重塑侵权债权人在破产法中的受偿地位,以适应后危机时代的社会发展要求。
The fact that the infringement creditor is placed in the position of ordinary creditor in insolvency proceedings may lead to de facto and legal inequity, yet most countries have affirmed such a status of compensation in bankruptcy legislation. Explore the legislative reasons behind the system. There are mainly alternative relief system, the inevitable cost of the priority principle of economic efficiency and the lag of legislation. Some of the reasons for such legislation are worthy of affirmation, such as the joint and several liability system of operators in separate relief theories and the remaining system of exemptions from debts; some should be questioned, such as the liability insurance and fund system in other remedies and the theory of costs. In the absence of joint and several liability system for operators in our country, we should reshape the compensable status of the tortious creditors in the bankruptcy law in order to meet the social development requirements in the post-crisis era.