我国可得利益赔偿制度的法律研究

发布时间：2018-01-31 17:27

本文关键词： 可得利益可预见规则确定性规则举证责任　出处：《湖南师范大学》2013年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：《合同法》第113条明确了对当事人可得利益的保护,可得利益赔偿制度在这十余年的立法过程中,有一些内容上的细化,但在我国的司法实践,该制度的适用率仍然极低,可得利益赔偿请求大多数难以获得支持。这是由于这项制度本身的不确定性和抽象性,且潜藏在一连串的生活现象因果联系链条中,任何一种意外都可以毁坏这一链条。合同法上的可得利益赔偿制度在实践中不能明晰其应用和推而广之,影响了合同预期目的实现、阻碍市场交易。纵观可得利益赔偿制度,其应用的难度,主要体现在它的界定规则、证明规则和计算方法上,即如何界定可得利益赔偿的范围、如何将这个范围用证据予以证明至法官所采信、以及如何确定赔偿的数额。通过对立法、司法解释分析和案例的统计,针对适用中的问题试着提出解决的路径,以期能够推动可得利益赔偿在法律实务中的普及和运用。可得利益赔偿,由可预见规则、减轻损害规则、损益相抵规则、责任相抵规则共同限定它的范围,其中可预见规则是最难以把握的,虽然法律明确规定了该原则,但实践审判中可得利益赔偿的可预见规则适用率非常低。通过案例分析和统计的方法论证如何适用可预见规则,得出在实践中应区分通常情况下与特别情形下的可得利益,可得利益赔偿案件中的通常情形一般通过合同目的、内容、原被告身份等进行推定,特殊情形依个案披露信息量为依据进行推定。如何证明可得利益赔偿,涉及到可得利益赔偿制度中的确定性规则、举证责任分配和计算方法。我国的可得利益赔偿制度中没有确定定的确定性规则,但数据分析可以得出司法实践中大量运用了确定性规则,所以对于可得利益损失的确定性认定,应通过司法解释把这些规则进行规范。明确该确定性是对损失的事实而言,不应该包括具体的数额,不能因为不能明确证明可得利益数额而推翻受害人受到可得利益损失的认定。同时,运用实际判案和理论论证,在计算方法上可使用同形比较和衡情估算的方法,提出可得利益赔偿等于受害方主张的可得利益损失减去不可以预见的损失、人为扩大的损失、因为违约所获得的收益,最后减去在经营时所付出的必要的成本。
[Abstract]:Article 113 of the contract Law defines the protection of the interests available to the parties, and the system of compensation for the benefits obtained has been refined in some aspects in the legislative process of these ten years, but in judicial practice in our country. The rate of application of the system remains extremely low, and most of the claims for benefits available are difficult to support. This is due to the uncertainty and abstraction of the system itself and its hidden chain of causal links in a chain of life phenomena. Any kind of accident can destroy this chain. In practice, the system of compensation for available benefits in contract law can not be clearly applied and popularized, which affects the realization of the expected purpose of the contract and hinders the market transaction. Looking at the system of available interest compensation, the difficulty of its application is mainly reflected in its defining rules, proof rules and calculation methods, that is, how to define the scope of available interest compensation. How to use evidence to prove this scope to the judge, and how to determine the amount of compensation. Through legislation, judicial interpretation analysis and case statistics, try to solve the problems in the application of the path. The aim is to promote the popularization and application of the available benefit compensation in the legal practice. The scope of interest compensation is defined by foreseeable rules, mitigation rules, profit and loss offset rules, liability offset rules, among which foreseeable rules are the most difficult to grasp. Although the law clearly stipulates this principle, the rate of application of foreseeable rules of compensation for interests is very low in practice. The method of case analysis and statistics is used to prove how to apply foreseeable rules. In practice, we should distinguish between the ordinary circumstances and the special circumstances. In the case of compensation, the ordinary situation is generally presumed by the purpose of the contract, the content, the identity of the original defendant, and so on. Special circumstances are based on the amount of information disclosed on a case-by-case basis. How to prove the compensation of available interests involves the deterministic rules in the system of compensation for available interests, the distribution of the burden of proof and the method of calculation. There are no definite deterministic rules in the system of compensation for available interests in our country. But the data analysis can be concluded that a large number of deterministic rules are used in judicial practice, so the deterministic determination of the loss of available benefits. These rules should be regulated through judicial interpretation. It is clear that this certainty is for the fact of loss and should not include a specific amount. The victim can not be overturned because he can not prove the amount of interest he can get. At the same time, he can not overturn the claim that the victim has suffered loss of interest. In the calculation method, we can use the method of homomorphic comparison and balance estimation, and put forward that the compensation for the available benefits is equal to the loss of the obtainable interest claimed by the injured party, minus the unforeseeable loss, and the artificially expanded loss. The proceeds from default are subtracted from the necessary costs incurred in the course of operation.
【学位授予单位】：湖南师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：D923.6

【参考文献】