論違反預(yù)約合同的損害賠償
發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-05-09 04:16
本文選題：強(qiáng)制履行 + 信賴?yán)?/strong>�。� 參考：《煙臺(tái)大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文
【摘要】：預(yù)約合同是相對(duì)于本合同而言的，是當(dāng)事人以訂立本約為目的而事先訂立的合同。我國(guó)2012年新頒布的《最高人民法院關(guān)于審理買賣合同糾紛案件適用法律問(wèn)題的解釋》第二條我們可以得知，當(dāng)事人之間簽訂完預(yù)約合同以后，在預(yù)約合同中約定的時(shí)間到來(lái)之后，簽訂預(yù)約合同的一方當(dāng)事人不按預(yù)約合同的規(guī)定與對(duì)方簽訂預(yù)約合同的，應(yīng)當(dāng)承擔(dān)違反預(yù)約合同的違約責(zé)任。這一條司法解釋填補(bǔ)了我國(guó)往日立法中關(guān)于預(yù)約合同的空白。這一條司法解釋雖然規(guī)定了當(dāng)事人不履行在將來(lái)某個(gè)日期簽訂本合同的義務(wù)可以主張預(yù)約合同的違約責(zé)任或者要求損害賠償，但是并未對(duì)違約責(zé)任形式和損害賠償范圍作出明確規(guī)定。由于合同法違約責(zé)任的重點(diǎn)在于賠償問(wèn)題，所以，本文將重點(diǎn)探討違反預(yù)約合同的損害賠償問(wèn)題。本文主要包括五個(gè)部分： 第一部分為關(guān)于預(yù)約合同的基本理論以及違反預(yù)約合同的形態(tài)問(wèn)題。這一部分主要介紹了預(yù)約合同的概念以及特征、預(yù)約合同與相關(guān)概念的區(qū)別，接著介紹了違反預(yù)約合同的形態(tài)問(wèn)題和損害后果。本部分最后介紹了違反預(yù)約合同應(yīng)該賠償?shù)睦碚摶A(chǔ)。 第二部分為違反預(yù)約合同損害賠償責(zé)任的認(rèn)定問(wèn)題。首先，本文通過(guò)比較法的方式對(duì)違反預(yù)約的責(zé)任與締約過(guò)失責(zé)任和西方國(guó)家的效率違約進(jìn)行比較，以進(jìn)一步明確違反預(yù)約合同責(zé)任的認(rèn)定。其次，本文介紹了違反預(yù)約合同損害賠償?shù)臍w責(zé)原則以及構(gòu)成要件，以明確違反預(yù)約合同損害賠償責(zé)任的適用范圍。 第三部分本文通過(guò)橫向比較，分析了損害賠償責(zé)任與強(qiáng)制履行責(zé)任、損害賠償責(zé)任與定金責(zé)任、損害賠償責(zé)任與違約金責(zé)任的聯(lián)系。 第四部分為本文的重點(diǎn)部分。這一部分將從信賴?yán)媾c履行利益的角度出發(fā)重點(diǎn)探討違反預(yù)約合同損害賠償責(zé)任的范圍、損害賠償責(zé)任的限制，最后分析了司法實(shí)踐中熱門問(wèn)題—差價(jià)問(wèn)題。通過(guò)這一部分的介紹筆者希望可以理清違反預(yù)約合同的損害賠償范圍問(wèn)題。 第五部分為筆總結(jié)部分，簡(jiǎn)要概括本文的觀點(diǎn)。意在完善我國(guó)的預(yù)約制度，更好的認(rèn)定違反預(yù)約合同的責(zé)任問(wèn)題。
[Abstract]:An appointment contract is a prior contract entered into by the parties for the purpose of entering into this contract as opposed to this contract. In 2012, the Supreme people's Court issued a new interpretation of the legal issues applicable to handling disputes over contracts of sale and purchase. Article 2. We can learn that after signing an appointment contract between the parties, If a party to an appointment contract fails to sign an appointment contract with the other party in accordance with the provisions of the reservation contract, he shall be liable for breach of the contract. This judicial interpretation fills up the gap in our country's previous legislation on appointment contracts. Although this judicial interpretation provides that a party who fails to perform the obligation to sign this contract at a future date may claim liability for breach of contract by appointment or claim damages, However, the form of liability for breach of contract and the scope of damages are not clearly defined. Since the liability for breach of contract law focuses on the issue of compensation, this paper will focus on the issue of compensation for breach of contract. This paper mainly includes five parts: The first part is about the basic theory of the appointment contract and the form of breach of the contract. This part mainly introduces the concept and characteristics of the reservation contract, the difference between the reservation contract and the related concepts, and then introduces the form of breach of the reservation contract and the damage consequences. Finally, this part introduces the theoretical basis of compensation for breach of appointment contract. The second part is the cognizance of liability for damages for breach of contract. First of all, this paper compares the liability of breach of appointment with the liability of fault in contracting and the efficiency breach of contract in western countries by means of comparative law, in order to confirm the liability of breach of contract. Secondly, this paper introduces the principle of liability for damages for breach of appointment contract and its constitutive requirements, in order to clarify the applicable scope of liability for damages for breach of contract of appointment. The third part analyzes the relationship between liability for damages and compulsory performance liability, liability for damages and deposit liability, liability for damages and liability for liquidated damages. The fourth part is the key part of this paper. This part will focus on the scope of damages liability for breach of contract and the limitation of liability for damages from the perspective of trust interest and performance interest. Finally, the paper analyzes the hot issue in judicial practice-the issue of price difference. Through the introduction of this part, the author hopes to clarify the scope of damages for breach of contract. The fifth part is the summary of the paper. The purpose of this paper is to perfect the reservation system in our country and to identify the liability of breach of the contract.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：煙臺(tái)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D923.6
【參考文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前2條
1 王禹;;關(guān)于預(yù)約合同的相關(guān)法律問(wèn)題研究[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)研究導(dǎo)刊;2012年08期
2 李開國(guó);張銑;;論預(yù)約的效力及其違約責(zé)任[J];河南省政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2011年04期
，本文編號(hào)：1864538
本文鏈接：http://www.sikaile.net/falvlunwen/hetongqiyue/1864538.html
最近更新
教材專著
