作者：陈龙业
作者介绍：最高人民法院二级高级法官，法学博士
出版日期：2025年12月9日
内容提要 《民法典》的实施需要科学处理法律规则与交易习惯的关系，形成具有现代性的交易习惯适用机制。交易习惯在司法裁判中存在不同的功能指向。实务中，应精准定位交易习惯在裁判中的角色，理顺不同习惯的适用场域与方法。交易习惯作为事实认定依据时仅发挥证据功能，不具有规范约束力，更不能替代价值层面的严肃论证。交易习惯作为裁判依据时，与法律规则之间并不存在固定的适用位阶。实务中，应跳出“恶习/良习”的简单二分，在深入审查案涉交易习惯实质合理性的基础上，对多元法源进行理性筛选。除补充或细化成文法律规则外，交易习惯还可以例外地发挥法律修正的功能。法官以交易习惯修正成文法律规则时，应充分衡量法律规则修正的需求强度以及习惯造法的社会经济效应，为交易习惯的适用提供充足的理由，以提升交易习惯的司法适用水平和相应裁判的说服力。
关键词 交易习惯 事实认定 法源补充 法律修正 司法三段论
Abstract: The implementation of the Civil Code requires scientifically handling the relationship between statutory rules and customary trade practices with delicacy, establishing a modern mechanism for the application of customary trade practices. Customary trade practices play multiple functional roles in judicial decisions. Judges should accurately apprehend such roles in adjudication, clarifying the applicable domains and methods of various customary trade practices. Where such customary practices serve for fact findings, they should be solely regarded as evidence. They can neither be accorded normative binding forces, nor can they substitute for rigorous value judgement. Where such customary practices serve as normative grounds, judges should not resort to any pre-established hierarchy between such practices and statutory rules. In practice, judges shall not abstractly resort to the so-called dichotomous divide between sound practices and bad ones. Instead, judges shall rationally select from multiple legal authorities after thoroughly evaluating the substantive rationality of pertaining customary trade practices. Besides supplementing or refining statutory rules, customary trade practices may occasionally serve to amend statutory rules. Where judges amend statutory rules with such practices, they must carefully assess the necessity of such amendments and the socio-economic consequences of applying such practices, providing sufficient justification for such practices so as to ensure the quality of such application and the persuasiveness of corresponding rulings.