摘要
在民法典合同编草案一审稿353条第3款之前,我国立法中并不存在违约方解除合同的规定。但冯玉梅案早在2004年便横空出世,并登上2006年最高人民法院公报,在司法领域开创了"违约方解除合同规则"。随后的审判实践大量援引冯玉梅案确立的个案规则,逐步发展升级为类案规则,并最终促成了《九民纪要》第48条"违约方起诉解除"规范的出现。在这一点上,司法既是先行者,也是先进者。可见,违约方解除合同规则来自于司法实践,旨在解决商事交易中的合同僵局。合同僵局是非违约方主张继续履行、违约方主张解除合同的诉求冲突导致的必然结果,在实践交易中大量真实存在。如果不妥善解决,必然带来重大效率损失,对双方当事人和社会来说都是一种无谓的消耗。现行法情势变更原则、继续履行排除规则等都有其特定指向,德国法重大事由解除规则并不成功,均无法有效化解合同僵局。因此,民法典起草中将违约方解除合同规则写入民法典是回应社会现实需要、实现民法典制度创新的良机。违约方解除合同规则是合同解除的例外规则,有着严格的限制条件和适用范围。它不会颠覆合同严守原则和诚实信用原则,不会带来额外的道德风险,也并不违反我国既有法律传统。起草中的民法典写入违约方解除合同规则,既是必要,也是可行的。
Contract rescission by the breaching party was not provided until the Clause Three of Article 353 in the first draft of the contract section of Civil Code in China was approved.However,with the case of Xinyu Company(plaintiff)v.Feng Yumei(Defendant)(Dispute over Contract on Shop Sale)published on the Gazette of the Supreme People’s Court in 2006,a ruling of rescinding contract by breaching party was introduced.Many subsequent trial practices widely quoted and followed the case of Feng Yumei and gradually take the ruling of individual case into a rule applied in the class of similar cases,which eventually leads to Article 48 in the Minutes of the 9 th National Courts’Civil and Commercial Trial Work Conference that sets the norm for the breaching party suing for contract rescission.In this sense,judicial practice plays pioneering and advancing role in rule-making.The rule of contract rescission by the breaching party comes from judicial practice and targets at the issues of contract deadlock in commercial transactions.Contract deadlock is inevitable in the conflict between the breaching party,who pleads for rescinding the contract,and the counter party,who insists on continuation.Contract deadlock is so common in practices that if not properly solved,it will cause massive losses and low efficiency for both parties and the society to pay for.Yet currently,no existing laws are available for the solution of contract deadlock since both the principle of judgement by changed circumstances and the principle of resuming the performance of exclusionary rule have their own specific application,and rescission rule for significant subject in German Civil Code does not work well.Therefore,that the rule of contract rescission by breaching party was drafted into Civil Code is an answer to the social need which is also a good opportunity for the innovation of the legislation of Civil Code.The rule of contract rescission by breaching party as an exceptional rule for contract rescission has strict limitation conditions and application scope.It complies with the strict observation of contracts and the principle of good faith with no extra moral risks and objection to Chinese legal tradition.Hence,it is feasible and necessary to draft contract rescission by the breaching party into the Civil Code.
作者
刘承韪
LIU Chengwei(School of Comparative Law,China University of Political Science and Law)
出处
《中国政法大学学报》
CSSCI
2020年第3期37-46,206-207,共10页
Journal Of CUPL
基金
中国政法大学青年教师学术创新团队支持计划(18CXTD05)
国家社科基金项目“违约惩罚性赔偿制度研究”(项目批准号:17BFX083)的阶段成果
