《合同法》根本违约制度研究

发布时间：2018-06-03 23:39

本文选题：根本违约 + 合同解除　；参考：《云南大学》2012年硕士论文

【摘要】：根本违约制度,最早源于英国普通法。因其在维护合同缔约双方中非违约方的利益、维护市场交易安全、规范市场交易秩序等方面起到了巨大的作用,因此,现如今不论英美法系还是大陆法系都在其法律体系中不同程度的确认了根本违约制度。我国《合同法》第九十四条以法律条文形式承认了根本违约制度。本文以过去学者对根本违约制度的研究为基础,归纳不同法系、不同国家以及国际公约中关于根本违约制度的内容,以此总结根本违约制度的构成和法律效果,进而说明我国法律引入根本违约制度的原因以及因此产生的问题,提出解决办法,希望能够将我国合同法中的根本违约制度完整的呈现出来。全文共分四个部分。第一部分是根本违约制度的概述。根本违约制度源于英国法,后被美国法、大陆法系国家以及一系列国际公约所承认。根本违约制度实际上是一种私权利的救济手段,其核心在于合同缔结后,在何种条件或者情况下“根本违约”能够成立。从条款主义判断标准到结果主义判断标准,再到以《联合国国际货物销售合同公约》为代表的多重限制标准,根本违约的构成始终是学界研究的焦点问题。根本违约制度的另一个重要内容是其带来的法律效果,普遍认为根本违约会带来合同解除和免责条款的阻却两种法律效力,两种法律效力对合同能否继续存在、非违约缔约当事人根据合同所期待得到的利益能够实现以及非违约缔约当事人的损失能够得到救济等内容会起到什么样的作用,始终备受人们的关注。第二部分是关于根本违约行为在我国合同法律中的违约形态体系中所处的地位。根本违约制度这一外来法律概念引入我国法律体系后,与我国原先既有的违约形态之间的关系如何,是必须加以阐述的问题。违约形态的划分是确立违约责任的前提,而根本违约不仅仅只是承担违约责任的方式。违约形态和根本违约两个概念来源于不同的法律体系,其适用方式、代表的价值取向均不相同,它们能够并存,但又不可能有包容和被包容的关系。引入一个不能被包容的法律概念并不是冒险之举。虽然在法律适用中,划分违约形态在违约责任的确立和划分等方面有其出色之处,但仍有其可望而不可及之处,根本违约恰好可以弥补这些缺点。因此,引入根本违约是基于其法律实用主义立场。第三部分是阐述根本违约与合同解除之间的关系。引起合同解除的原因不仅仅只有一种,该部分致力于分析根本违约与合同解除之间的关系(本文所指的合同解除均仅指违约情形下的合同解除)。根本违约与合同解除之间的关系可以定义为：引起与被引起、限制与被限制。进一步分析后,我们可以发现：在违约的情况下,达到根本违约程度必然引起合同的解除,而未达到这一程度的违约行为并不必然引起合同解除。缔结合同的目的成为根本违约与合同解除之间的桥梁,它也决定了二者的必然联合。根本违约与合同解除,离开了任何一方都难以获得强大的生命力,因此它们是形影相随、不可分离的。第四部分是分析我国《合同法》对根本违约制度的评价。我国《合同法》全文没有使用过“根本违约”这一概念,而且对根本违约的一个重要法律效果：免责条款的阻却也没有提及。我国《合同法》对根本违约的引入不能说是一个完整全面的法律概念引入,而是一种试探性的引入。纵然引入一个外来的法律概念,需要从其价值取向、适用过程等方面加以考虑,盲目的“一步到位、一口吃成大胖子”的做法并不能得到认同,但我国《合同法》自身并不完善,其在法律制度的价值取向、法律条款的具体适用程序等方面与根本违约制度所要求的还相差甚远。因此,完善法律制度、完整的引入根本违约制度,一方面需要我国立法者和法律工作者的努力,通过立法和完善相关合同的解释,为根本违约制度提供客观方面的保障；另一方面需要对合同缔约当事人加以引导,使其真正树立起诚实信用和“合同神圣”的信念,严守缔约时做出的承诺,为根本违约制度建立主观方面(法律思想意识方面)的保障。通过这些努力,使根本违约制度在中国法律体系的土壤中茁壮成长。
[Abstract]:The system of fundamental breach of contract originated from the British ordinary law, which has played a great role in maintaining the interests of the non breaching parties in the contracting parties, maintaining the security of the market transactions, and standardizing the order of the market transactions. The ninety-fourth article of the contract law of China acknowledges the fundamental breach of contract in the form of legal provisions. This article, based on the previous scholars' research on the system of fundamental breach of contract, sums up the contents of the system of fundamental breach of contract in different legal systems, different countries and international conventions so as to make up the Constitution and legal effects of the system of fundamental breach of contract. The reasons for the introduction of the fundamental breach of contract and the problems arising from the introduction of the law in our country are presented, and the solutions are put forward in the hope that the system of fundamental breach of contract in the contract law of our country can be completely presented.
The full text is divided into four parts. The first part is an overview of the system of fundamental breach of contract. The fundamental breach system is derived from the law of the United Kingdom, and then recognized by the United States law, the civil law countries and a series of international conventions. The fundamental breach system is actually a remedy for private rights, and its core lies in what conditions or circumstances after the contract is concluded. " Fundamental breach of contract has always been the focus of academic research. Another important content of the system of fundamental breach of contract is the legal effect of the fundamental breach of contract. It is believed that the fundamental breach of contract will bring two kinds of legal effects, namely, the termination of the contract and the exemption clause, and the effect of the two legal effects on whether the contract can continue to exist, the interests of the non contract parties can be realized according to the expectation of the contract and the loss of the non contract parties can be remedied. People have attracted much attention.
The second part is about the status of the fundamental breach of contract in the form of breach of contract in the contract law of our country. After the introduction of the concept of the fundamental breach of contract, the relationship between the original default form of our country and the original concept of default in our country, it is a problem that must be explained. The division of default form is to establish a breach of contract. The premise of responsibility is that the fundamental breach is not only the way to undertake the liability for breach of contract. The two concepts of breach of contract and fundamental breach of contract are derived from different legal systems, their application and the value orientation of the representative are different, they can coexist, but they can not be inclusive and inclusive. Although it is not an adventure. Although in the application of the law, the division of breach of default in the establishment and division of liability for breach of contract has its excellent place, but it still has its potential, the fundamental breach just can make up for these shortcomings. Therefore, the introduction of fundamental breach of contract is based on its legal pragmatism position.
The third part is to explain the relationship between the fundamental breach of contract and the dissolution of the contract. The cause of the termination of the contract is not only one, but the part is devoted to the analysis of the relationship between the fundamental breach of contract and the dissolution of the contract. The meaning is: cause and be caused, limit and be restricted. After further analysis, we can find that in the case of breach of contract, reaching the degree of fundamental breach of contract inevitably leads to the termination of the contract, and the failure to achieve this degree of breach does not necessarily cause the termination of the contract. The purpose of the conclusion of the contract is to be the bridge between the fundamental breach of contract and the dissolution of the contract. It also determines the inevitable union of the two. The fundamental breach of contract and the termination of the contract are difficult to obtain from any of the parties. Therefore, they are inseparable and inseparable.
The fourth part is to analyze the evaluation of the contract law of China on the system of fundamental breach of contract. The full text of the contract law of China has not used the concept of "fundamental breach of contract", and it has not been mentioned as an important legal effect to the fundamental breach of contract: the introduction of the contract law to the fundamental breach of contract is not a complete and comprehensive introduction. The introduction of the concept of law is a tentative introduction. In spite of the introduction of a foreign legal concept, it needs to be considered from its value orientation and the process of application. The blind "one step in place, a big fat man" can not be recognized, but the contract law of China is not perfect, and its value in the legal system is not perfect. The orientation, the specific application procedure of the legal provisions and other aspects are far from the requirements of the fundamental breach of contract. Therefore, the perfection of the legal system and the complete introduction of the fundamental breach of contract system, on the one hand, need the efforts of the legislators and legal workers of our country, and provide an objective aspect of the fundamental breach of contract through legislation and the perfection of the interpretation of the relevant contracts. On the other hand, it is necessary to guide the contracting parties of the contract to truly establish the faith of the honesty and the "contract sanctity", to strictly abide by the commitments made in the contracting parties and to establish the subjective aspects of the system of the fundamental breach of contract (legal ideology). Through these efforts, the fundamental breach of contract system is in the Chinese legal system. The soil thrives.
【学位授予单位】：云南大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D923.6

【参考文献】