违约责任探微  

On Liability for Breach of Contract

作　　者：崔建远[1] CUI Jianyuan

机构地区：[1]清华大学法学院

出　　处：《法治研究》2022年第6期18-34,共17页Research on Rule of Law

摘　　要：违约责任时常含有道德评价于其中,不包含解除合同、作为形成权的减价权,而违约救济则不然。不真正义务被违反不导致违约责任的成立,但在违约救济领域则并不如此“一刀切”。质量保证义务不是物的瑕疵担保责任,亦非违约责任,两者并行不悖。风险负担规则负责合同因不可归责于双方当事人的原因而不能履行时确定不利益落在哪一方的头上,这显然不同于违约责任。不过,在当事人一方有过错、风险转移于他(它)的情况下,某些“风险负担”却蜕变为“违约责任的承担”,表明风险负担和违约责任之间并非永隔天然的鸿沟。尽管违约行为具有质的规定性,但不妨允许当事人把本不属于违约行为的情形约定为引起违约责任。债权人实施不当行为有时也构成违约。欺诈,不仅属于合同撤销制度中的元素,在某些情况下也是违约行为的表现形式。受领迟延,虽然多为不真正义务,但在法律明确规定或当事人明确约定其引发违约责任时则为真正义务。尽管我国民法典在违约责任一章规定了定金及其罚则,但仍不宜把定金罚则归入违约责任的体系,因为交付定金义务属于第一性义务,而非第二性义务。交付定金的一方违约,定金不予返还,从接受定金的一方看,他未承担义务,这背离违约责任的规定。定金遵循从属性规则,而违约责任则系替代关系或补充关系。违约方拒不执行继续履行的判项仍须承担违约损害赔偿责任。Liability for breach of contract often implies moral evaluation,not including right to cancel the contract and right to reduce the price as a right of formation,but remedy for breach of contract is not as such.Breach of untrue obligations does not lead to establishment of liability for breach of contract,but it is not so inflexible in the field of remedies for breach of contract.Quality assurance obligation is neither a warranty liability for defects nor a liability for breach of contract;the two are not mutually exclusive.The risk bearing rule is to determine which party is responsible for the bad interest when a contract cannot be performed due to reasons attributable to neither party,which is obviously different from the liability for breach of contract.However,when one of the parties is at fault and the risk is transferred to him(it),some"risk burden"transforms into"liability for breach of contract",indicating that there is no natural gap between the two.Although breach of contract is qualitatively prescriptive,the parties may be allowed to agree on circumstances that do not constitute breach of contract as causing liability for breach of contract.The creditor's misconduct sometimes constitutes a breach of contract.Fraud is not only an element of the contract cancellation system,but also a manifestation of breach of contract in some cases.Although a delay in receipt is not a real obligation in most circumstances,it is a real obligation when the law clearly stipulates or the parties clearly agree that it causes liability for breach of contract.Although the civil code of China stipulates deposit and its penalty in the chapter of liability for breach of contract,it is still inappropriate to include deposit penalty in the system of liability for breach of contract,because the obligation to pay deposit is a primary obligation,not a secondary obligation.If the party who pays the deposit defaults,the deposit will not be returned.From the perspective of the party who receives the deposit,he has not undertaken any obl

关 键 词：违约责任 违约救济 风险负担 违约行为 定金罚则 

分 类 号：D923.6[政治法律—民商法学]