因第三人原因造成的违约与责任承担——兼论《合同法》第121条的理论解构

发布时间：2018-08-12 19:16

【摘要】：《合同法》第121条严格恪守债的相对性,规定在因第三人原因导致债务人违约的情况下,债务人应向债权人承担违约责任,仅在向债权人承担违约责任后,债务人才可以向第三人追偿。据此,除不可抗力这一狭窄的免责事由外,债务人近似承担的是一种"不可思议的超级债务"。过错责任、客观责任两大立法例下的履行障碍或者违约风险的分配结果极为相似且都为债务人的责任承担设置了合适的边界。基于现实的需要与理性的要求,解释上应认为第121条没有完全排除债权人向第三人求偿之可能,在第三人的原因是引起债务人违约的直接原因且第三人主观上存有故意、债务人主观上无过错时,应允许债务人根据具体情形选择适用不可抗力、情势变更、风险负担、合同解除四种方式来免除其责任承担。
[Abstract]:Article 121 of the contract Law strictly adheres to the relativity of the debt. It stipulates that in the case of a third party causing the debtor to breach the contract, the debtor shall bear the liability for breach of contract to the creditor, and only after the debtor has assumed the liability for breach of contract to the creditor. Only the debtor can claim compensation from a third party. Therefore, in addition to force majeure, the debtor assumed an "incredible super debt". Fault liability, objective liability under the two major legislative cases of obstacles to performance or default risk distribution results are very similar, and both for the debtor's responsibility to bear the appropriate boundaries. Based on the realistic needs and rational demands, it should be considered that Article 121 does not completely exclude the possibility of creditors claiming compensation from the third party. The reason of the third party is the direct cause of the debtor's default and the third party's subjective intention. When the debtor has no fault subjectively, the debtor should be allowed to choose to apply force majeure, situation change, risk burden and contract dissolution according to the specific circumstances.
【作者单位】：中国政法大学民商经济法学院;
【分类号】：D923.6

【相似文献】