论文部分内容阅读
在司法实践中,夫妻一方对外提供担保,另一方是否需要承担连带责任一直存有较大争议,尽管我国《婚姻法》、《婚姻法司法解释(二)》、最高人民法院民一庭于2014年7月12日作出的[2014]民一他字第10号答复和最高人民法院民一庭于2015年作出的[2015]民一他字第9号复函对该问题有所涉及,但针对具体案件如何切实保证债权人和配偶一方的合法权益,值得进一步探讨。本文结合现有两种学术上存在的争议,对两种观点进行深入比较,分析夫妻共同债务和夫妻个人债务的构成要素,来认定夫妻一方对外担保债务,配偶一方是否需要承担连带责任。
In judicial practice, one of the spouses provides guarantee to the outside world, and the other party has a great controversy over whether it is necessary to assume joint and several liability. Although the “Marriage Law” and “Judicial Interpretation of the Marriage Law (II)” in China, the People’s Court of the Supreme People’s Court in 2014 7 The [2014] Min-Shixiao No.10 reply dated January 12 and the [2015] Min-Shixi No. 9 Reply of the Supreme Court of People’s Court made in 2015 by the Supreme People’s Court have been dealt with on this issue but for the specific How to effectively guarantee the legitimate rights and interests of creditors and spouses is worth further investigation. Based on the two existing academic disputes, this article makes an in-depth comparison of the two perspectives and analyzes the components of the common debt of husband and wife and the personal debt of husband and wife to determine whether the spouses should bear the joint liability for the external guarantee debt.