委托人与拍卖人的违约责任——兼论《拍卖法》第40条第1款  

The Liability of the Client and the Auctioneer for Breach of Contract——Also on Article 40 (1) of the Chinese Auction Law

作　　者：郑臻 Zheng Zhen

机构地区：[1]中国人民大学法学院

出　　处：《环球法律评论》2021年第4期88-99,共12页Global Law Review

摘　　要：在拍卖法律关系之中,买受人未能按照约定取得拍卖标的的,通常情形下,仅需委托人或拍卖人中的一方承担违约责任;但在特定情形下,买受人也可主张委托人与拍卖人承担连带责任。委托人与拍卖人中应由哪一主体承担违约责任,取决于拍卖人以何人名义行事。若拍卖人以委托人名义行事,则由委托人承担违约责任;若拍卖人以自己名义行事,则通常由拍卖人承担违约责任,但也存在例外。在违约责任免除的认定上,需要考察拍卖人与委托人告知义务的履行情况,同时还应注意是否存在"自相矛盾"与"没有明示"的免责条款。委托人与拍卖人的违约责任仅规定于《拍卖法》第40条第1款,对于该条款的理解,应将其置于《民法典》与相关法律的体系之中,并综合考察拍卖行业惯例等内容进行体系解释。In the legal relationship of auction, if the buyer fails to obtain the object of auction in accordance with the agreement, under normal circumstances, the liability for breach of contract should only be borne by either the client or the auctioneer. However, under certain circumstances, the buyer may also demand that the client and the auctioneer be jointly and severally liable. The question of which subject should bear the liability for the breach of contract depends on in whose name the auctioneer acts. If the auctioneer acts in the name of the client, the client shall bear the liability for breach of contract;if the auctioneer acts in his own name, he himself usually bears the liability for breach of contract, but there are exceptions. In determining the exemption from liability for breach of contract, it is necessary to examine the performance of the notification obligation by the auctioneer and the client, and whether there are "self-contradictory" and "unclear" exemption clauses. The liability of the client and the auctioneer for breach of contract is only stipulated in Article 40 Paragraph 1 of the Auction Law. This paragraph should be understood by being placed in the Chinese Civil Code and the system of relevant laws, and systematically interpreted through a comprehensive examination of the practices of the auction industry, among others.

关 键 词：委托人 拍卖人 违约责任 免责事由 

分 类 号：D923[政治法律—民商法学]