發(fā)布時間：2018-03-31 09:10

  本文選題：違約損害　切入點：可預見性規(guī)則　出處：《中國社會科學院研究生院》2015年碩士論文

【摘要】：目前,我國在違約賠償方面主要的研究內(nèi)容就是關(guān)于其范圍的研究,違約賠償?shù)姆秶诓煌那樾蜗戮哂胁煌兓吞攸c,對此問題進行理論研究能夠很好的指導實踐,解決生活中的疑難雜案。此外,對違約損害賠償范圍進行研究還有著重要的社會意義,能夠?qū)崿F(xiàn)賠償制度本身的價值追求,切實保護好當事人的合法權(quán)益。實踐中,當對違約賠償?shù)姆秶M行確定時,由于各個國家自身的立法背景以及賠償原則的不同,因此各個國家和地區(qū)所確定的違約賠償范圍存在很大的差別。具體來說,在世界范圍內(nèi)目前有兩種賠償模式,第一種主要是以德國為代表的,該種賠償模式被稱之為因果關(guān)系模式,該種模式和完全賠償?shù)脑瓌t基本上是一致的,第二種是以美國和英國為代表的賠償模式,該模式被稱之為可預見性的賠償模式,它以締約時是否可以預見到損害的發(fā)生作為賠償?shù)臉藴省?9世紀以后,世界范圍內(nèi)大多數(shù)國家在法律的制定或者判例中全面確立了可預見性規(guī)則。自從1854年的Hadley v.Baxendale案件之后,可預見性規(guī)則在違約賠償中得到了更為廣泛的應(yīng)用,其影響也是空前的,該規(guī)則適用的范圍也更加普遍。如果按照Hadley規(guī)則,通常情況下原告能夠得到賠償?shù)姆秶驗檫`約所造成的自然狀態(tài)下的損失,還包括被告所知道的非正常情況下的損失。可預見性規(guī)則主要在我國的合同法中體現(xiàn)出來,在我國合同法中對此規(guī)則進行了詳細的分析和研究。借鑒于此,筆者在本文中對此規(guī)則進行了探討和研究,研究的內(nèi)容包括該規(guī)則的制度實踐和學說整理以及相當因果關(guān)系理論的起源、結(jié)構(gòu)與缺陷,并對前述兩種違約損害賠償范圍的基本限定模式進行了比較分析,認為相當因果關(guān)系在限定違約損害賠償范圍方面過于寬泛,相比之下,可預見性規(guī)則在限制違約損害賠償范圍方面的作用更加突出。在此基礎(chǔ)上,筆者對我國《合同法》中的關(guān)于可預見規(guī)則的規(guī)定表示贊同,認為把此規(guī)則作為損害賠償范圍的限定是妥當?shù)?并針對此規(guī)則在司法適用中遇到的障礙提出具體的完善意見。
[Abstract]:At present, the main research content of the compensation for breach of contract in our country is the research on its scope. The scope of the compensation for breach of contract has different changes and characteristics under different circumstances. In addition, it is of great social significance to study the scope of compensation for breach of contract, which can realize the value pursuit of the compensation system itself and protect the legitimate rights and interests of the parties. When determining the scope of compensation for breach of contract, due to the different legislative background and compensation principle of each country, the scope of compensation for breach of contract is very different in different countries and regions. There are two models of compensation in the world at present. The first is mainly represented by Germany, which is called the causality model, which is basically consistent with the principle of full compensation. The second is the compensation model represented by the United States and the United Kingdom, which is called the predictable compensation model. It regards whether the damage can be foreseen at the time of contracting as the standard of compensation after the 19th century. Most countries all over the world have established the rule of predictability in their laws or precedents. Since the case of Hadley v.Baxendale in 1854, the rule of predictability has been applied more widely in the compensation for breach of contract, and its influence is unprecedented. The scope of application of this rule is also more general. If under the Hadley rule, the scope of compensation normally available to the plaintiff is due to the natural state of loss caused by the breach, The rule of predictability is mainly embodied in the contract law of our country, and it is analyzed and studied in detail in the contract law of our country. The author discusses and studies this rule in this paper. The contents of the research include the institutional practice and doctrine arrangement of the rule and the origin, structure and defects of the equivalent causality theory. In addition, the author makes a comparative analysis of the two basic limited models of the scope of damages for breach of contract, and considers that the causality is too broad in limiting the scope of damages for breach of contract, in contrast, The predictability rules play a more important role in limiting the scope of damages for breach of contract. On this basis, the author agrees with the provisions on foreseeable rules in contract Law of China. It is considered that it is appropriate to take this rule as the limitation of the scope of compensation for damages, and some concrete suggestions are put forward for the obstacles encountered in the judicial application of this rule.
【學位授予單位】：中國社會科學院研究生院
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：D923.6

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前8條

1 朱巖;;當代德國侵權(quán)法上因果關(guān)系理論和實務(wù)中的主要問題[J];法學家;2004年06期

2 左傳衛(wèi);;質(zhì)疑侵權(quán)法中因果關(guān)系的二分法[J];法學;2007年04期

3 孫麗娜;違約損害賠償中可預見性規(guī)則與因果關(guān)系的比較[J];經(jīng)濟論壇;2002年09期

4 解亙;;我國合同拘束力理論的重構(gòu)[J];法學研究;2011年02期

5 范利平;侵權(quán)法上因果關(guān)系研究[J];現(xiàn)代法學;2004年03期

6 呂彥;美國侵權(quán)行為法判斷因果關(guān)系的規(guī)則與實踐[J];現(xiàn)代法學;1998年06期

7 譚睿娟;;兩大法系可預見性規(guī)則適用問題的比較研究[J];西南民族大學學報(人文社會科學版);2011年03期

8 毛瑞兆;論合同法中的可預見規(guī)則[J];中國法學;2003年04期

，

本文編號：1690071