论违约损害赔偿中的可预见性规则与相当因果关系

发布时间：2018-03-31 09:10

本文选题：违约损害　切入点：可预见性规则　出处：《中国社会科学院研究生院》2015年硕士论文

【摘要】：目前,我国在违约赔偿方面主要的研究内容就是关于其范围的研究,违约赔偿的范围在不同的情形下具有不同变化和特点,对此问题进行理论研究能够很好的指导实践,解决生活中的疑难杂案。此外,对违约损害赔偿范围进行研究还有着重要的社会意义,能够实现赔偿制度本身的价值追求,切实保护好当事人的合法权益。实践中,当对违约赔偿的范围进行确定时,由于各个国家自身的立法背景以及赔偿原则的不同,因此各个国家和地区所确定的违约赔偿范围存在很大的差别。具体来说,在世界范围内目前有两种赔偿模式,第一种主要是以德国为代表的,该种赔偿模式被称之为因果关系模式,该种模式和完全赔偿的原则基本上是一致的,第二种是以美国和英国为代表的赔偿模式,该模式被称之为可预见性的赔偿模式,它以缔约时是否可以预见到损害的发生作为赔偿的标准。19世纪以后,世界范围内大多数国家在法律的制定或者判例中全面确立了可预见性规则。自从1854年的Hadley v.Baxendale案件之后,可预见性规则在违约赔偿中得到了更为广泛的应用,其影响也是空前的,该规则适用的范围也更加普遍。如果按照Hadley规则,通常情况下原告能够得到赔偿的范围因为违约所造成的自然状态下的损失,还包括被告所知道的非正常情况下的损失。可预见性规则主要在我国的合同法中体现出来,在我国合同法中对此规则进行了详细的分析和研究。借鉴于此,笔者在本文中对此规则进行了探讨和研究,研究的内容包括该规则的制度实践和学说整理以及相当因果关系理论的起源、结构与缺陷,并对前述两种违约损害赔偿范围的基本限定模式进行了比较分析,认为相当因果关系在限定违约损害赔偿范围方面过于宽泛,相比之下,可预见性规则在限制违约损害赔偿范围方面的作用更加突出。在此基础上,笔者对我国《合同法》中的关于可预见规则的规定表示赞同,认为把此规则作为损害赔偿范围的限定是妥当的,并针对此规则在司法适用中遇到的障碍提出具体的完善意见。
[Abstract]:At present, the main research content of the compensation for breach of contract in our country is the research on its scope. The scope of the compensation for breach of contract has different changes and characteristics under different circumstances. In addition, it is of great social significance to study the scope of compensation for breach of contract, which can realize the value pursuit of the compensation system itself and protect the legitimate rights and interests of the parties. When determining the scope of compensation for breach of contract, due to the different legislative background and compensation principle of each country, the scope of compensation for breach of contract is very different in different countries and regions. There are two models of compensation in the world at present. The first is mainly represented by Germany, which is called the causality model, which is basically consistent with the principle of full compensation. The second is the compensation model represented by the United States and the United Kingdom, which is called the predictable compensation model. It regards whether the damage can be foreseen at the time of contracting as the standard of compensation after the 19th century. Most countries all over the world have established the rule of predictability in their laws or precedents. Since the case of Hadley v.Baxendale in 1854, the rule of predictability has been applied more widely in the compensation for breach of contract, and its influence is unprecedented. The scope of application of this rule is also more general. If under the Hadley rule, the scope of compensation normally available to the plaintiff is due to the natural state of loss caused by the breach, The rule of predictability is mainly embodied in the contract law of our country, and it is analyzed and studied in detail in the contract law of our country. The author discusses and studies this rule in this paper. The contents of the research include the institutional practice and doctrine arrangement of the rule and the origin, structure and defects of the equivalent causality theory. In addition, the author makes a comparative analysis of the two basic limited models of the scope of damages for breach of contract, and considers that the causality is too broad in limiting the scope of damages for breach of contract, in contrast, The predictability rules play a more important role in limiting the scope of damages for breach of contract. On this basis, the author agrees with the provisions on foreseeable rules in contract Law of China. It is considered that it is appropriate to take this rule as the limitation of the scope of compensation for damages, and some concrete suggestions are put forward for the obstacles encountered in the judicial application of this rule.
【学位授予单位】：中国社会科学院研究生院
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D923.6

【参考文献】