违约责任与侵权责任竞合中的精神损害赔偿  

Mental Damage Compensation in the Concurrence of Liability for Breach of Contract and Liability for Tort

作　　者：郑永宽[1] Zheng Yongkuan

机构地区：[1]厦门大学法学院,福建厦门361005

出　　处：《中州学刊》2022年第11期63-71,共9页Academic Journal of Zhongzhou

摘　　要：违约责任与精神损害赔偿并非天然存在不可逾越之鸿沟。合同法具有保护功能,对于属于固有利益损害的精神损害片面地拒绝违约责任救济,缺乏有效的法理依据。《民法典》第996条应解释为认同违约精神损害赔偿,受害人亦可另行通过侵权之诉主张精神损害赔偿,只是在违约之诉中一并主张违约精神损害赔偿,可能一次全部实现损害救济,避免讼累及程序上的繁难,且主张违约责任,过错构成要件相对宽松,并可分享合同自由所可能蕴含的各种价值。There are not insurmountable gaps between liability for breach of contract and compensation for mental damage.The contract law has the protective function,and it lacks effective legal basis to unilaterally reject the relief of liability for breach of contract for the spiritual damage that belongs to the inherent interest damage.Article 996 of the Civil Code should be interpreted as in favor of the compensation for mental damage caused by breach of contract,and the victim can also claim compensation for mental damage through tort action.Claiming compensation for mental damage through action for breach of contract can realize the damage relief completely at one time,and avoid the procedure difficulty.Moreover,the constitutive element of fault of liability for breach of contract is relatively loose,and claim for mental damage compensation through action for breach of contract can share the values of freedom of contract.

关 键 词：违约责任 侵权责任 竞合 违约精神损害赔偿 

分 类 号：D923[政治法律—民商法学]