期刊文献+

违约可得利益损失的确定规则 被引量:36

Certainty Rule of Lost Profit due to Breach of Contract
原文传递
导出
摘要 可得利益是合同法的中心关注,是当事人订立合同的目的所在,对其保护事关当事人交易的积极性和社会整体经济利益的增长,因此各国的违约损害赔偿制度对于可得利益损失普遍给予较高程度的保护。我国合同法等法律虽然明确设定了违约可得利益的概念和规则,但司法实践却表现得较为谨慎、保守甚至是消极,多数法院会因为可得利益损失的不确定性(证据不确定性和计算不确定性)而否定原告的主张。要改变我国法表达与实践脱节的现实困境,需要从程序和实体两方面确立可得利益损失的确定规则,一方面有效降低可得利益损失的证明标准,另一方面对可得利益损失的计算标准加以类型化,以有效保护非违约方的可得利益和期待利益,增强我国违约救济制度的适用性和操作性。 The lost profit is the central concern of the contract law and the purpose of the parties en- tered into the contract, the protection of which is related to the enthusiasm to exchange and the growth of the overall economic interests, therefore almost all the countries set a higher degree of protection of it. Although Chinese Contract Law sets clearly the rules of the lost profit, the judicial practice is much more cautious,, conservative or even negative, that is, few Chinese courts support plaintiffs' claim for their lost profit because of its uncertainty. In the eye of Chinese courts, the uncertainty of the lost profit can be mainly classified into two kinds, one is the uncertainty of proof, and the other is uncertainty of calculation. To change the predicament between Chinese a certainty rule of lost profit should be established on both procedural and law and judicial practice, substantive perspectives. From the procedural perspective, what we should do is to lower the proof standard of the lost profit. Not only should we refer to the advanced experience in the United States, borrow its reasonable certainty standard of contract damages, and establish the proof standard of fact-amount distinction, but also full play the initiative, wisdom and discretion of judges to support the plaintiffs' claim for their lost profit. From the substantial perspective, we advocate "business" or operating profit as its central clue to set and categorize the calculation standard of lost profit, which includes the standard of one' s own operating profit, the standard of others' operating profit, the new business standard and the alternative standard. Only in this way, can we protect effectively the non-defaulting party' s lost profit and expectation interest, and enhance the applicability and operability of China' s remedy sys- tem of contract law.
作者 刘承韪
出处 《法学研究》 CSSCI 北大核心 2013年第2期84-101,共18页 Chinese Journal of Law
关键词 违约损害赔偿 可得利益 合理确定性 营业标准 damages for breach of contract, lost profit, reasonable certainty, business rule
  • 相关文献

参考文献31

  • 1E. Allan Farnsworth, Contracts, Aspen Law Business, 3rd ed. , 1999, p. 16. 被引量:1
  • 2[英]P.S阿狄亚.《合同法导论》,赵旭东等译,法律出版社,2002年版,第154页,第162—163页,第159页,第156页,第157页,第157页,第154页. 被引量:6
  • 3See Lon L. Fuller & William R. Perdue, The Reliance Interest in Contract Damages, 46 Yale Law Journal 52 (1936). 被引量:1
  • 4E. Allan Farnsworth, Legal Remedies for Breach of Contract, 70 Colum. L. Rev. 1145, 1146 (1970). 被引量:1
  • 5G. H. Treitel, Remedies for Breach of Contract : A Comparative Account, Clarendon Press, 1988, p. 56. 被引量:1
  • 6See Griffinv. Colver, 16 N.Y. 489 (1858). 被引量:1
  • 7E. Allan Farnsworth & William F. Young, Contracts: Cases and Materials, Foundation Press, 5th ed. , 1995, p. 546. 被引量:1
  • 8United States Naval Inst. v. Charter Communications, 936 F. 2d 692, 697 (2d Cir. 1991 ). 被引量:1
  • 9Charles T. McCormick, Handbook on the Law of Damages, West, 1935, p. 124. 被引量:1
  • 10Charles T. McCormick, The Standard of Certainty in the Measurement of Damages, 43 Yale L. J. 1109, 1112 (1934). 被引量:1

二级参考文献22

  • 1关中翔.论可得利益损失的赔偿[J].法律科学(西北政法大学学报),1989,11(5):53-57. 被引量:14
  • 2李浩.差别证明要求与优势证据证明要求[J].法学研究,1995,17(5):31-36. 被引量:21
  • 3中华人民共和国最高人民法院民事审判第一庭.民事审判指导与参考(总第15辑)[M].北京:法律出版社,2003:367-373. 被引量:1
  • 4Kenneth H York etc. Cases and Materials on Remedies[M]. West Publishing Co., 1985:46. 被引量:1
  • 5闫仁河.美国合同法中的新营业规则[C]//民商法论丛(第37卷).北京:法律出版社,2007:397. 被引量:1
  • 6Lost Profits as Contract Damages: Problems of Proof and Limitations on Recovery [J]. The Yale Law Journal, 1956,65: 1018-1019. 被引量:1
  • 7Eric C. Schneider. Consequential Damages in the International Sale of Goods: Analysis of Two Decisions [J]. University of Pensylvania Journal of International Business Law, 1995, 16: 658. 被引量:1
  • 8Story Parchment Co. v. PatersonParchment Paper Co.,282 U.S. 562 (1931) [EB/OL]. http: // supreme. justia. com/ us / 282 / 555 / case. html#562, 2008-11-20. 被引量:1
  • 9Debra L. Goetz etc. Special Project: Article Two Warranties in Commercial Transactions: An Update [Part 2 of 2] [J]. Comell L. Rev., 1987,72: 1247. 被引量:1
  • 10A. Corbin.Corbin On Contracts[M]. West Publishing Co., 1964:135-147. 被引量:1

共引文献8

同被引文献410

引证文献36

二级引证文献124

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部