“根本违约”的认定相关法律问题研究——基于国际商事公约的视角
Study of Legal Issues Related to the Determination of Fundamental Breach of Contract—Perspective Based on International Commercial Conventions
摘要: 为了在推动对外贸易蓬勃发展的同时合理规避我国外贸企业的法律风险,对于可能造成严重合同后果的“根本违约”制度之认定标准应予深刻理解与精准把握。诞生于由多国参加的《联合国国际货物销售合同公约》,“根本违约”制度兼具英美法系与大陆法系的特点;早年间国内学界惯常以大陆法系的思维通过构成要件严格把握其认定标准;近年来各国法院却鲜少以判断是否满足构成要件的模式适用该制度。变化集中表现在法院对各要件的重要性及适用的先后顺序突破了传统学术观点,即将“损害结果”认定为必要条件,而其他构成要件认定为充分条件;以及“可预见性规则”应当作为认定标准,还是应当作为阻却其成立的抗辩理由,学界和各国法院的观点存在争议。
Abstract:
In order to promote the vigorous development of foreign trade and at the same time reasonably avoid the legal risks of China’s foreign trade enterprises, the criteria for determining the “fundamental breach” system, which may cause serious contractual consequences, should be deeply understood and accurately grasped. Born in the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, which is attended by many countries, the system of “fundamental breach” has the characteristics of both common law and civil law systems; in the early years, the domestic academic community used to strictly grasp the criteria of its determination through the constitutive elements in the thinking of the civil law system. In recent years, the courts have rarely applied the system by judging whether the constituent elements are satisfied or not. The changes focus on the importance of the elements and the order of their application, which break away from the traditional academic view, i.e., the “damage result” is considered as the necessary condition and the other constituent elements are considered as the sufficient condition; and the “foreseeability rule” should be should be a criterion or a defense to prevent its establishment, the opinions of scholars and courts in various countries are controversial.
参考文献
|
[1]
|
邹国勇, 陈曼莉. 论CISG的根本违约制度[J]. 理论月刊, 2012(7): 174-178.
|
|
[2]
|
郑旭文. 国际货物买卖中卖方根本违约对风险转移的影响[J]. 当代法学, 2002(7): 94-97.
|
|
[3]
|
戚枝淬. 对根本违约几个问题的探讨[J]. 河北法学, 2001, 19(6): 118-120.
|
|
[4]
|
郑辉. 试析根本违约之合同目的落空[J]. 人民司法, 2009(4): 74-77.
|
|
[5]
|
伍治良. 根本违约判定标准功能之回归研究——兼评我国合同法相关规定之不足[J]. 法律科学, 2002(3): 121-128.
|
|
[6]
|
安文靖. CISG根本违约“可预见性”标准的学理与判例分析——兼论对我国民法分则合同编立法之启示[J]. 河北法学, 2019, 37(1): 86-100.
|
|
[7]
|
王利明. 论根本违约与合同解除的关系[J]. 中国法学, 1995(3): 20-28.
|
|
[8]
|
崔建远. 论合同目的及其不能实现[J]. 吉林大学社会科学学报, 2015, 55(3): 40-50+172.
|
|
[9]
|
王洪亮. 民法典中解除规则的变革及其解释[J]. 法学论坛, 2020, 35(4): 23-32.
|
|
[10]
|
韩世远. 合同法总论[M]. 北京: 法律出版社, 2018.
|
|
[11]
|
刘承韪. 论英美法引入与中国合同法的发展——从清末修律到2020年民法典[J]. 学术月刊, 2022(4): 100-120.
|
|
[12]
|
赵文杰. 论法定解除权的内外体系——以《民法典》第563条第1款中“合同目的不能实现”为切入点[J]. 华东政法大学学报, 2020, 23(3): 126-137.
|