论共同遇难者死亡顺序规则的语言表达形式——对《民法典》第1121条的解释
An Exploration of Co-Victims Death Order Rule’s Expression—Interpretation of Article 1121 of “Civil Code”

死亡顺序规则是民事推定规范中较为特殊的存在，因其带有“推定”字样的表述形式，我国学界及实务界通常将其定性为民事推定规范。某些学者认为其并不具备推定的显著特征，如：存在基础事实、事实间具有高概率联系等，因此这些学者认为死亡顺序规则不是真正的推定。《继承法意见》第2条规定的死亡顺序规则表达结构为“某某不能证明……，则推定……”，不可反驳的推定规范常以这种“不能证明”形式出现。《民法典》第1121条将客观层面的“不能”修订成主观层面的“难以”，表明死亡顺序规则具有可以被推翻的特点。根据两者差异，可以判定经修订后的死亡顺序规则较拟制规范、拟制性推定等其他类别归类为推定规范是更具合理性的。因此，现行法下的死亡顺序规则采用“推定”的表述形式是合理的。
The order of death rule is a relatively special existence among civil presumption norms. Because of its expression with the word “presumption”, China’s academic and practical circles tend to characterize it as a civil presumption norm. According to some scholars, it does not have the distinctive characteristics of presumption, such as the existence of basic facts and a high degree of probability between the facts. Therefore, these scholars consider that the order of death rule is not a real presumption. The expression structure of the death order rule stipulated in Section 2 of the “Inheritance Law Opinion” is “Someone is unable prove that something is certain..., then it is presumed...” Irrefutable presumptive norms often appear in such kind of “non-provable” form. Section 1121 of the Civil Code amends “impossible” on an objective level to “difficult” on a subjective level, indicating that the rules of order of death have characteristics of being overturned. Based on the differences between the two, it can be determined that the revised order of death rules are more reasonable than those classified as presumptive specifications in other categories such as prepared specifications and presumptive presumptions. Therefore, it is reasonable for the order of death rules under current law to be expressed in the form of “presumption”.