违约损害赔偿中替代交易规则的功能定位与适用分析

Functional Positioning and Applicability Analysis of the Substitution Transaction Rule in Breach of Contract Compensation

摘要: 在民商合一的视角下，违约损害赔偿中的替代交易规则是落实《民法典》作为市场经济基本法的重要制度。在违约损害赔偿体系下，替代交易规则具有功能上的多元性和适用上的复杂性。替代交易规则具有损害赔偿与减轻损失两大功能。作为损害赔偿中可得利益的计算方式，替代交易具有现实性与确定性的优势。作为减损规则中减损义务的实施措施，替代交易符合诚信原则与交易效益的双重要求。这两大功能发挥的前提是替代交易行为符合法律规定的适用要件。合同解除并非替代交易规则的适用要件，在合同未解除时应当允许守约方实施替代交易，便于其损失的填补。替代性是合理性要件的基础内涵，通过合理性要件可以平衡原合同双方的利益，防止一方通过不合理的替代交易转嫁风险。在替代交易发挥损害赔偿功能的过程中，替代交易需要与其他可得利益的计算方式进行协调，替代交易规则不具有适用上的优先性；在替代交易发挥减轻损失功能的过程中，替代交易需要与其他损害赔偿的限制规则进行协调，避免损害的重复计算。

Abstract: From the perspective of unification of civil and commercial law, the substitute transaction rule in breach of contract damages is a crucial institutional mechanism for implementing the Civil Code as a fundamental law of the market economy. Within the framework of breach of contract damages, the substitute transaction rule exhibits both functional diversity and applicational complexity. It serves two primary functions: compensating for damages and mitigating losses. As a method for calculating expected benefits in damages, the substitute transaction rule offers advantages in practicality and determinacy. As a measure to fulfill the duty to mitigate losses, it aligns with both the principles of good faith and transactional efficiency. The prerequisite for the effective operation of these two functions is that the substitute transaction must comply with the statutory conditions for its application. Contract termination is not a necessary condition for the application of the substitute transaction rule; rather, the non-breaching party should be permitted to engage in substitute transactions even when the contract has not been terminated, to facilitate the recovery of losses. The substitutability is the foundational element of the reasonableness requirement, which helps to balance the interests of both parties by preventing one party from shifting risks through unreasonable substitute transactions. In the process of applying the substitute transaction rule to compensate for damages, it must be coordinated with other methods of calculating expected benefits, and the substitute transaction rule does not possess a priority in application. In the context of mitigating losses, the substitute transaction must also be harmonized with other limitations on damage compensation to avoid double-counting of damages.