【作者】 邸振龙；

【导师】 刘世元；

【作者基本信息】 吉林大学 ， 法律， 2004， 硕士

【摘要】 缔约上过失问题，自罗马法以来，一直是立法及学者讨论的重大问题，直至19世纪中期(1861年)，耶林的“缔约过失责任”理论的提出，标志缔约过失责任理论的正式诞生。作为大陆法系的民法理论，对英美法系也产生了重大影响。缔约过失责任是指在合同订立过程中，一方因故意或过失违背依其诚实信用原则所应尽的义务，使合同未成立、被撤销或无效而致另一方信赖利益的损失时应承担的民事责任。缔约过失责任的概念包含了“故意”和“过失”两种主观因素，所以缔约过失责任应称为“缔约过错责任”更为恰当，原因在于缔约所产生的责任不仅来源于“过失”，也包括“故意”，如果称法不做改变，容易令人误解为仅有过失责任。缔约过失责任理论的出现，将在缔约过程中应承担的一种新的民事责任类型引入了原有理论体系，对合同责任进行了重新划分，冲击了罗马法上将民事责任分为违约责任和侵权责任的传统观点。在责任产生的前提、违法义务的性质等方面缔约过失责任、违约责任、侵权责任三者存在明确的界限。缔约过失责任是民法上继合同责任、侵权行为责任、不当得利产生的返还责任、无因管理责任之后第五种独立的民事责任，在立法上应当将其规定为一般的民事责任。目前关于缔约过失责任的理论基础大致有四种学说：侵权行为说、法律规定说、法律行为说、诚实信用原则说。关于缔约过失责任的构成要件有三要件说、五要件说，而四要件说更为贴切，更能反映缔约过失责任的本质特征。即缔约当事人违反了先合同义务；缔约相对人受到损失；违反先合同义务的一方主观上存在过错；过错与损失之间存在因果关系。这其中<WP=44>尤为重要的是要正确理解先合同义务的含义。先合同义务是指契约生效前，契约双方当事人所负的附随义务。这一概念包含了先合同义务的发生和存在范围。?随着我国改革开放的深入，商业经济的得到了迅猛发展，民事主体之间的商品交换和民事交往更加频繁，而其主要方式是通过缔结各种形式上的合同进行的，因此正确处理合同缔结阶段可能发生的各种问题，明确责任承担，为当事人建立有效经济交往关系制造一个良好的运行环境显得尤为重要。对于缔约过失责任， 我国《中华人民共和国民法通则》(以下简称民法通则)仅在第六十一条部分地包含缔约上过失的规定，但对在合同未成立时是否应承担缔约过失责任未作明确规定。原三部合同法(即《经济合同法》、《涉外经济合同法》、《技术合同法》)中都没有这方面的明确规定，因此，当双方当事人在未订立合同前已产生的经济纠纷，难以合同纠纷予以处理，让缔约方承担受害方的责任无法律依据，而给受害方造成经济损失。1999年我国在《中华人民共和国合同法》中第一次确立了缔约过失责任制度，这标志着我国缔约过失责任制度的理论和立法迈上新的台阶。这对促进社会主义市场经济健康发展，树立诚信交易观念，完善我国债法制度具有重要的意义。但不容否认，关于缔约过失责任的许多问题理论界还存在争议。如缔约过失责任与违约责任、侵权责任的区别，缔约过失责任的赔偿范围应怎样确定等。要正确解决这些问题，进一步理解缔约过失责任的含义，首先需要深入理解缔约过失责任的概念、性质、先合同义务应怎样界定等这些基本点。我国对缔约过失责任的规定提出较晚，在有些方面还不是很完善，还需要在实践中不断改进。只有这样才能鼓励人们参与商品交易活动的积极性，促进社会经济向前发展。????更多还原

【Abstract】 Culpa in Contrahendo is a significant question that has been discussing by legislation and scholars since Roman legalism. Until the middle of the 19th century Rudolf v. Jhering raised the theory “Culpa in Contrahendo ” ,which marked the formal birth of the theory “Culpa in Controhendo ”. Theory of the civil law that belongs to the continental legal system has also had a great effect on Anglo-American legal system. Culpa in Contrahendo is a kind of civil liability that should be undertaken when one side fails to fulfill his obligation according to the Principle of Honest and Credibility in the process of signing a contract because of intention or culpa, which results in that the contract does not hold water, or is canceled or invalid so that the other side’s benefit of trusting suffers loss. The concept of Culpa in Controhendo includes two subjective factors: “intention” and “culpa” so it is more proper to call it “Fault in Contrahendo ” rather than “Culpa in Contrahendo”. The reason for it is that the liability from contracting not only comes from “culpa” but also includes “intention”. If the method of calling is not changed, it is easy for people to misunderstand that there is only liability of culpa. Theory of Culpa in Contrahendo has compartmentalized the liability of the contract in a new way since it appeared. It introduces a new kind of civil liability which should be undertaken in the process of signing a contract into the original theory system. It impacts the traditional opinion that civil liability is divided into Liability for Breach of Contract and Liability for Torts in Roman legalism. There exists explicit boundary among Culpa in Contrahendo ,Liability for Breaking Agreements and Liability for Torts in some aspects such as premise of causing liability, character of failing to fulfill the obligations and so on. Following Liability of Contract , Liability for Torts , Obligations Arising from Unjust Enrichment and Obligations Arising from Voluntary Service, Culpa in Contrahendo is the fifth kind of independent civil liability. It should be stipulated as common civil liability in legislation. At present there are about four different doctrines about the theoretical basis of Culpa in Contrahendo. They are Doctrine of Torts, Doctrine of Law Stipulation ,Doctrine of Law Behavior and Doctrine of Principle of Honest and Credibility. There are different theories about constitution prerequisite for Culpa in Contrahendo. They are three-prerequisite theory and five-prerequisite theory, however, four-prerequisite theory is more <WP=46>appropriate. It can reflect essential character of Culpa in Contrahendo better. That is: party of contracting breaks the liability in pre-contract; relative person of contracting suffers damages; one side that breaks the liabilities in pre-contract has fault in mind ; there is causality between fault and damages. It is most important to understand the meaning of liabilities in pre-contract correctly. Liabilities in pre-contract refer to the incidental liabilities that two parties of two sides in a contract should be undertaken before a contract goes into effect. The concept includes the extent of occurrence and existence of pre-contract. With further development of reform and opening policy in our country, commercial economy has been developed extremely fast, commodity exchange and civil communication between civil subjects have become more frequent, yet its main way goes on by signing all kinds of contracts so it appears more important that we should deal with various problems that are likely to come about in the stage of signing a contract in a correct way , explicit liability undertaking and try to build a good motion environment in order to establish efficient economic communication relationship between parties .For Culpa in Contrahendo, our country’s General Rule For Civil Law of People’s Republic of China(General Rule for short in the following) only partly includes some regulations for Culpa in Contrahendo in No.61 Item, however, it has no definite regul更多还原