效率违约理论的价值冲突  

The Value Conflict of the Efficient Breach Theory

作　　者：孙良国[1] 赵梓晴 SUN Liang-guo;ZHAO Zi-qing(School of Law,Jilin University,Changchun 130012,China)

机构地区：[1]吉林大学法学院

出　　处：《东北师大学报（哲学社会科学版）》2019年第5期79-89,共11页Journal of Northeast Normal University(Philosophy and Social Science Edition)

基　　金：教育部基地重大项目(16JJD820004)

摘　　要：温州退房潮提出了效率违约理论难题。拨开效率违约理论的迷雾势在必行。《合同法》、司法实践以及学界通说都否定了效率违约理论的一般性地位。事实上,基于赔偿不足、创造信息难题、增加新交易成本、不利于优越谈判方等问题,效率违约理论并不能实现其赖以为凭的效率,同时违反道德性、忽视商事实践、错误解读约定违约金自治性安排的意义等。基于现行法而做出的判决的法律效果与社会效果是统一的,若基于效率违约理论裁判,对个案中违约方有利,其社会效果往往是对违约方不利且增加讼累和交易成本,有损交易秩序的稳定。The upsurge of returning house in Wenzhou showed the issues of the efficient breach,which is unavoidable to demystify to people.According to the Contract Law,judicial practice,and the common aspiration in law circle,the general position of efficient breach theory is not recognized.In fact,in view of problems such as inadequate compensation,emergence of information issues,addition of transaction costs,and disadvantages of negotiators,the efficient breach theory is not able to work efficiently.Meanwhile,it may cause misbehavior like violating the moral code,ignoring commercial practice,misunderstanding the self-made arrangement of the liquidated damages for breach of contract,and so on.Judgments based on the existing law are accordant in both legal effect and social effect.However,when judging on grounds of efficient breach,the result may benefit one defaulting party,but the social effect will be unfavorable to all the defaulting parties.Also,this can raise litigation exhaustion and transaction costs,harming the stability of transaction order.

关 键 词：效率违约理论 损害赔偿 实际履行 违约自由 社会效果 

分 类 号：D923.6[政治法律—民商法学]