論CISG中的根本違約及其在我國合同法中的繼受
發(fā)布時間：2018-07-22 17:07
【摘要】：根本違約是以違約及其后果的嚴(yán)重程度為標(biāo)準(zhǔn)對違約行為所作的劃分，現(xiàn)代意義上的根本違約制度起源于英國判例法，英國法院將合同條款區(qū)分為條件條款和擔(dān)保條款，違反條件條款非違約方得解除合同；違反擔(dān)保條款非違約方不能解除合同，只能請求損害賠償。此后，英國法院在實踐中創(chuàng)造了中間條款，作為對條件條款和擔(dān)保條款的補充，違反此類條款，非違約方能否解除合同，須視違約的性質(zhì)及其嚴(yán)重性而定。英國對根本違約的判斷，經(jīng)歷了以合同條款屬于條件還是擔(dān)保為依據(jù)的條款主義，到以違約行為及其后果的嚴(yán)重程度為依據(jù)的結(jié)果主義。大陸法系中的根本違約體現(xiàn)為合同解除制度，法國、德國、意大利等大陸法系國家普遍將違約的嚴(yán)重性作為合同解除的前提條件�！堵�(lián)合國國際銷售合同公約》（以下簡稱《公約》）吸收了大陸法系和英美法系的合理成分，對根本違約作了明確的定義，并形成了以《公約》第25條為核心的違約救濟體系。根本違約一方面賦予當(dāng)事人解除合同的權(quán)利，一方面限制當(dāng)事人的濫用合同解除權(quán)。此外，，根本違約對于風(fēng)險轉(zhuǎn)移和免責(zé)條款效力也有所影響。 《公約》對我國《合同法》的制定產(chǎn)生了積極的影響。在合同法定解除制度中，我國《合同法》繼受《公約》關(guān)于根本違約的規(guī)定，借鑒其關(guān)于根本違約的客觀判定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，以違約后果的嚴(yán)重性作為解除合同的前提條件，同時摒棄了違約后果可預(yù)見性的主觀判定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，減少了因主觀標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的介入造成的在判定根本違約時的不確定性。理論界對根本違約的判定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)有不同的意見，筆者比較贊同折中說，即以違約后果的嚴(yán)重性為主要判定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，同時結(jié)合違反義務(wù)的類型對根本違約進(jìn)行判定。我國《合同法》第94條第2款至第4款規(guī)定了因違約而導(dǎo)致的合同解除情形，其中94條第4款被多數(shù)學(xué)者認(rèn)為是《合同法》關(guān)于根本違約的直接體現(xiàn)。第94條第4款規(guī)定，“當(dāng)事人一方遲延履行債務(wù)或者有其他違約行為致使不能實現(xiàn)合同目的”，另一方當(dāng)事人可以解除合同。合同目的成為判斷根本違約的關(guān)鍵因素。我國《合同法》中的合同目的對應(yīng)《公約》第25條“根據(jù)合同有權(quán)期待得到的東西（what he is entitled to expect underthe contract），我國學(xué)者對合同目的的理解經(jīng)歷了由窄向?qū)挵l(fā)展的過程，并逐漸與《公約》的解釋趨于一致，即合同目的乃締約當(dāng)事人通過訂立和履行合同，最終期望獲得的利益、享有的權(quán)利、得到的東西、達(dá)到的結(jié)果或狀態(tài)。對合同目的的理解和界定不同，將直接影響根本違約的構(gòu)成與否。合同目的是合同本身所反映出來的客觀利益，是從帶有客觀基礎(chǔ)的合同中推斷出來的利益，不因當(dāng)事人的主觀意圖的改變而改變。實踐中對根本違約的判定不一而同，出現(xiàn)同案不同判的現(xiàn)象，一些認(rèn)定根本違約的判決尚難令人信服。法官作為合同目的的探究者和闡釋者，應(yīng)結(jié)合合同規(guī)定、締約情況、當(dāng)事人之間的洽談、商業(yè)慣例、違約后補救的可能性等進(jìn)行界定，同時遵循根本違約制度鼓勵交易、限制當(dāng)事人濫用解除權(quán)的價值理念，具體案例具體分析，對根本違約作出恰如其分的判定。 我國《合同法》的法定解除制度吸收了《公約》根本違約制度的合理成分，堪稱一部具有現(xiàn)代法精神的高水平立法。然而，法定解除制度存在以下不足：默示預(yù)期違約與不安抗辯未實現(xiàn)有機契合；不能實現(xiàn)合同目的的判定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)過于簡單、抽象；解除權(quán)的一元模式導(dǎo)致制度內(nèi)部邏輯混亂。筆者建議用完整的默示預(yù)期違約制度代替不安抗辯制度；對合同目的進(jìn)行概括式的定義，同時采取列舉式的規(guī)定輔以具體考慮因素，并設(shè)立兜底條款以保證法律的彈性適用；確立合同解除與合同終止的二元結(jié)構(gòu)。
[Abstract]:The fundamental breach of contract is the division of breach of contract by the standard of breach of contract and its consequences. In the modern sense, the fundamental breach of contract system originates from the British case law. The British court distinguishes the terms of the contract into a condition clause and a guarantee clause. The breach of a condition clause is not a breach of contract; a breach of a guarantee clause is not a breach of contract. To be able to terminate the contract, it can only claim damages. After that, the British court created an intermediate clause in practice as a supplement to the conditions and guarantee clauses. In violation of such clauses, the non breaching party will be able to dissolve the contract depending on the nature and severity of the breach. The judgment of the fundamental breach of contract in the UK has gone through the article of the contract. The fundamental breach of contract in civil law countries, such as France, Germany and Italy, generally regards the seriousness of breach of contract as a prerequisite for the termination of the contract. < United Nations international sales cooperation. The same Convention (hereinafter referred to as < convention >) absorbs the rational elements of the civil law and common law system, defines a fundamental breach of contract clearly and forms a system of breach of contract at the core of the twenty-fifth article of the Convention. On the one hand, the fundamental breach of contract gives the parties the right to dissolve the contract, and on the one hand, the parties' abuse of the right to terminate the contract. Fundamental breach also has an impact on the risk transfer and the validity of the exemption clause.
< convention > has a positive impact on the formulation of the contract law of China. In the system of legal termination of the contract, the contract law of China, following the provisions on the fundamental breach of contract by the Convention, draws on its objective criteria for determining the fundamental breach of contract, taking the seriousness of the consequences of breach of contract as a prerequisite for the termination of the contract, and abandoning the foreseeable consequences of the breach of contract. The subjective criteria of sex determination reduce the uncertainty in determining the fundamental breach caused by the intervention of the subjective standard. The theorists have different opinions on the criteria for determining the fundamental breach of contract. The author agrees with the compromise that the main criterion is the seriousness of the consequences of breach of contract, and the fundamental breach of contract is carried out in combination with the type of breach of duty. Judgment. The contract law of China, ninety-fourth clause second to fourth paragraph stipulates the situation of termination of contract caused by breach of contract, of which 94 and fourth paragraphs are considered by most scholars as the direct embodiment of the contract law on the fundamental breach of contract. The ninety-fourth article and fourth paragraph stipulates that "one party or one party may delay the performance of the debt or have other defaults resulting in the failure to achieve the contract list." The other party can dissolve the contract. The purpose of the contract is the key factor to judge the fundamental breach. The contract purpose in the contract law of China corresponds to the twenty-fifth article of the Convention (what he is entitled to expect underthe contract). The understanding of the contract aims by Chinese scholars has gone through the narrow direction. The process of wide development and gradually converge with the interpretation of the Convention, that is, the purpose of a contract is the right, the right, the result or the state of the party that the contracting parties are expected to obtain by concluding and performing the contract. The difference in understanding and definition of the purpose of the contract will directly affect the composition of the fundamental breach of contract. It is the objective interest reflected by the contract itself, the benefit deduced from the contract with the objective basis, not the change of the subjective intention of the parties. In practice, the judgment of the fundamental breach of contract is different and the same case is different. The explorer and interpreter of the purpose of the contract should define the conditions of the contract, the negotiation between the parties, the negotiation between the parties, the business practice, the possibility of remedial after default, and follow the fundamental breach of contract system to encourage the transaction, and limit the value idea of the parties' abuse of the right to terminate, specific case analysis and the exact breach of the contract. The judgement of the division.
The legal termination system of the contract law of China absorbs the reasonable component of the basic breach of contract, which can be called a high level legislation with the spirit of modern law. However, the legal termination system has the following shortcomings: implied anticipatory breach of contract and unrealized defenses are not realized organically; the criteria for the failure to realize the contract are too simple. The author suggests that a complete implied anticipatory breach of contract system should be replaced by a complete implied anticipatory breach of contract system, a general definition of the purpose of the contract, a list of provisions and specific considerations, and the establishment of a submission to ensure the flexible application of the law; and the establishment of a contract. The two yuan structure to terminate and terminate the contract.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D923.6;D997.1
本文編號：2138165
[Abstract]:The fundamental breach of contract is the division of breach of contract by the standard of breach of contract and its consequences. In the modern sense, the fundamental breach of contract system originates from the British case law. The British court distinguishes the terms of the contract into a condition clause and a guarantee clause. The breach of a condition clause is not a breach of contract; a breach of a guarantee clause is not a breach of contract. To be able to terminate the contract, it can only claim damages. After that, the British court created an intermediate clause in practice as a supplement to the conditions and guarantee clauses. In violation of such clauses, the non breaching party will be able to dissolve the contract depending on the nature and severity of the breach. The judgment of the fundamental breach of contract in the UK has gone through the article of the contract. The fundamental breach of contract in civil law countries, such as France, Germany and Italy, generally regards the seriousness of breach of contract as a prerequisite for the termination of the contract. < United Nations international sales cooperation. The same Convention (hereinafter referred to as < convention >) absorbs the rational elements of the civil law and common law system, defines a fundamental breach of contract clearly and forms a system of breach of contract at the core of the twenty-fifth article of the Convention. On the one hand, the fundamental breach of contract gives the parties the right to dissolve the contract, and on the one hand, the parties' abuse of the right to terminate the contract. Fundamental breach also has an impact on the risk transfer and the validity of the exemption clause.
< convention > has a positive impact on the formulation of the contract law of China. In the system of legal termination of the contract, the contract law of China, following the provisions on the fundamental breach of contract by the Convention, draws on its objective criteria for determining the fundamental breach of contract, taking the seriousness of the consequences of breach of contract as a prerequisite for the termination of the contract, and abandoning the foreseeable consequences of the breach of contract. The subjective criteria of sex determination reduce the uncertainty in determining the fundamental breach caused by the intervention of the subjective standard. The theorists have different opinions on the criteria for determining the fundamental breach of contract. The author agrees with the compromise that the main criterion is the seriousness of the consequences of breach of contract, and the fundamental breach of contract is carried out in combination with the type of breach of duty. Judgment. The contract law of China, ninety-fourth clause second to fourth paragraph stipulates the situation of termination of contract caused by breach of contract, of which 94 and fourth paragraphs are considered by most scholars as the direct embodiment of the contract law on the fundamental breach of contract. The ninety-fourth article and fourth paragraph stipulates that "one party or one party may delay the performance of the debt or have other defaults resulting in the failure to achieve the contract list." The other party can dissolve the contract. The purpose of the contract is the key factor to judge the fundamental breach. The contract purpose in the contract law of China corresponds to the twenty-fifth article of the Convention (what he is entitled to expect underthe contract). The understanding of the contract aims by Chinese scholars has gone through the narrow direction. The process of wide development and gradually converge with the interpretation of the Convention, that is, the purpose of a contract is the right, the right, the result or the state of the party that the contracting parties are expected to obtain by concluding and performing the contract. The difference in understanding and definition of the purpose of the contract will directly affect the composition of the fundamental breach of contract. It is the objective interest reflected by the contract itself, the benefit deduced from the contract with the objective basis, not the change of the subjective intention of the parties. In practice, the judgment of the fundamental breach of contract is different and the same case is different. The explorer and interpreter of the purpose of the contract should define the conditions of the contract, the negotiation between the parties, the negotiation between the parties, the business practice, the possibility of remedial after default, and follow the fundamental breach of contract system to encourage the transaction, and limit the value idea of the parties' abuse of the right to terminate, specific case analysis and the exact breach of the contract. The judgement of the division.
The legal termination system of the contract law of China absorbs the reasonable component of the basic breach of contract, which can be called a high level legislation with the spirit of modern law. However, the legal termination system has the following shortcomings: implied anticipatory breach of contract and unrealized defenses are not realized organically; the criteria for the failure to realize the contract are too simple. The author suggests that a complete implied anticipatory breach of contract system should be replaced by a complete implied anticipatory breach of contract system, a general definition of the purpose of the contract, a list of provisions and specific considerations, and the establishment of a submission to ensure the flexible application of the law; and the establishment of a contract. The two yuan structure to terminate and terminate the contract.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D923.6;D997.1
【參考文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條
1 王守祥,陳仲;根本違約制度研究[J];阿壩師范高等�？茖W(xué)校學(xué)報;2001年01期
2 崔俊貴;我國合同解除的相關(guān)問題探討[J];北京科技大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2004年04期
3 徐玉梅;;商業(yè)合同附隨義務(wù)根本違約之判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)[J];商業(yè)研究;2010年06期
4 宋宗宇,曾文革;論根本違約[J];重慶工業(yè)管理學(xué)院學(xué)報;1998年01期
5 葉巍;根本違約與中國合同法[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2001年01期
6 寧踢坡;合同解除溯及力探討——兼論合同終止[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2003年08期
7 馬忠法;;“合同目的”的案例解析[J];法商研究;2006年03期
8 崔建遠(yuǎn);合同解除的疑問與釋答[J];法學(xué);2005年09期
9 陳群;陳泉;;根本違約與合同解除[J];法制與社會;2009年01期
10 蔡慶輝;《聯(lián)合國國際貨物銷售合同公約》與我國《合同法》比較[J];國際貿(mào)易問題;1999年07期
相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前2條
1 張紅;繼續(xù)性合同終止制度研究[D];湖南大學(xué);2011年
2 徐玉梅;根本違約論[D];黑龍江大學(xué);2010年
本文編號：2138165
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/hetongqiyue/2138165.html
