预期违约制度研究

【作者】 贾宝金；

【导师】 邓瑞平；

【作者基本信息】 西南政法大学 ， 法律， 2006， 硕士

【摘要】 预期违约制度是英美法系的一项特有制度，其巧妙的制度设计为债权人提供了更为周全的保护。本文主要从比较法的视角，通过案例分析和法律规范的比较研究对英美法的预期违约制度进行论述，结合《公约》中的规定和大陆法系中的不安抗辩权制度进行深入的分析和比较，理论与实践结合，从多角度分析预期违约制度，并在此基础上对我国合同法中的相关条款进行评析，以期提出对完善我国合同法中预期违约制度的意见，更好的保护当事人的权利，保障交易的顺利进行。大陆法系不安抗辩权与默示预期违约在保护债权人利益方面在功能上类似。但与英美法中的预期违约存在较大差异。通过一系列的比较，得出结论：预期违约制度的引进是必要的，预期违约制度有助于使损失降低到最低限度，有利于对受害人合理而充分的保护，我国应进一步完善预期违约制度。本文除导言外，共分五章：第一章预期违约制度的产生和发展，介绍了预期违约制度的确立与发展。明示预期违约始于1852年英国霍切期特诉德·拉·图尔案；默示预期违约始于1894年英国辛格夫人诉辛格案。英国判例确立的原则，为美国法所吸纳、发展。《公约》在借鉴预期违约的同时在其含义、分类、判断标准和救济方式上有新的突破；我国在大陆法系的体系内借鉴了预期违约制度，在预期违约的适用范围、违约范围、违约时间、救济措施等与英美法系不同。但我国的规定过于简单，应进一步完善。第二章预期违约的构成要件，分为实质要件和形式要件。实质要件包括时间要件、理由要件和程度要件。预期违约发生的时间是在合同有效成立后履行期到来之前。理由要件是指预期违约应无合法的理由。预期违约的程度要件是指违约方必须不履行合同的主要义务；形式要件指明示预期违约在意思表示的方式上必须是自愿地、肯定地、明确地表示将在履行期到来后不履行合同义务。默示预期违约在意思表示的方式上是一方当事人在履行期到来之前有合理理由预见对方当事人将不履行或不能履行合同。合理理由一般指经济状况不佳、商业信用不佳、准备履约或履约中的行为表明有违约的表现。第三章预期违约的救济方式主要有三种：中止履行、解除合同和损害赔偿。中止履行是指在对方有违反合同的明显迹象时，他方可以要求对方提供履约担保，在担保提供之前，暂时中止履行自己在合同项下的义务。由中止履行权发展出两项权利，即要更多还原

【Abstract】 Anticipatory breach of contract system is a unique system of British and American legal system. Its ingenious system design has provided a completer protection for the creditor. From the view angle of comparison test, through the case analysis and the legal standard comparison, this article mainly researches the British and American anticipatory breach of contract system., Unifies the stipulation in Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods and the mainland legal system restlessly contradicts the power system, this article carries on the thorough analysis and the comparison, unifies the theory and practice, analysis anticipatory breach of contract system from the multiple perspectives ,And in this foundation, this article carries on the evaluation of our country’s contract law and the related provision, so as to make some proposition to anticipatory breach of contract system of our country’s contract law, and protect litigant’s right better, safeguard the transaction. In the creditor’s benefit protection aspect, The mainland legal system’s restlessly contradict right and anticipatory breach of contract system are similar in the function, But it has many difference with the British and American law. It is necessary to introduce anticipatory breach of contract system. Through a series of comparison, We may see that anticipatory breach of contract system is helpful in reducing the loss, and in protecting the right of victims. Our country should further consummate anticipatory breach of contract system. Besides introduction, this article divides five chapters altogether: First chapter is about the appear and development of anticipatory breach of contract system, and Introduces anticipatory breach of contract system’s establishment and the development. It indicates clearly that anticipatory breach of contract begins in 1852 English Hochester v. De La Tour document especially, and Silently showed anticipatory breach of contract begins in 1894 English Madame Synger v. Synger document. The principles established by English legal precedent are borrowed in and developed by American law.The Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of更多还原