【摘要】一直以来，关于流质条款的问题不仅在学界争议不休，在民事审判中亦是纷乱不止，“同案异判”的现象时有发生。随着社会的转型，传统社会中禁止流质契约的诸多理由放之今日，其不合理性已日趋突显，域外立法的趋势亦说明于此。从社会价值、经济价值与法理价值三个层面考量分析，将流质契约强作民事与商事之分实无必要，亦缺乏可操作性。从我国最新通过的《民法典》来看，立法者对于流质契约的态度已然软化，然考察具体条文内容仍有不足。在法典实施之后，应当通过司法解释的形式，对于《民法典》中有关流质契约的实现方式予以明晰。

【关键词】流质条款 担保物权 优先受偿意思自治 民法典

On the interpretation of liquidity pledge in civil code

[Abstract] for a long time, the issue of liquidity pledge terms has not only been controversial in academic circles, but also in civil trials. The phenomenon of "different judgments in the same case" has occurred from time to time. With the transformation of the society, many reasons for the prohibition of mobile pledge contract in the traditional society have been put forward today, and its irrationality has become increasingly prominent, which is also illustrated by the trend of foreign legislation. From the three aspects of social value, economic value and legal value, it is unnecessary to force the floating pledge contract into the civil and commercial aspects, and it is also lack of operability. From the perspective of the newly adopted civil code of China, the attitude of legislators towards the mobile pledge contract has softened, but there are still some deficiencies in the investigation of specific provisions. After the implementation of the code, we should clarify the way to realize the mobile pledge contract in the civil code through judicial interpretation.

[Key words] liquidity pledge clause; security interest; priority of repayment; autonomy of will; civil code