【摘要】：我國(guó)《合同法》對(duì)合同解除時(shí)的損失如何進(jìn)行補(bǔ)償這一問(wèn)題規(guī)定得較為籠統(tǒng)，，導(dǎo)致法學(xué)理論界對(duì)此爭(zhēng)論不休，在實(shí)際的合同解除實(shí)務(wù)操作中也因標(biāo)準(zhǔn)不一而出現(xiàn)“同案不同判”的結(jié)果，損害了守約方利益、法律權(quán)威及司法公正。本文正是從合同解除的溯及力、合同解除與損害賠償?shù)牟⒋妗⒎ǘㄟ`約解除時(shí)的損害賠償范圍的確定這三個(gè)方面，對(duì)法定違約解除時(shí)的損害賠償問(wèn)題進(jìn)行探究討論，以便在法律規(guī)定不明的情況下理順合同解除和損害賠償?shù)年P(guān)系，更好地解決理論與實(shí)務(wù)中遇到的法定違約解除時(shí)的損害賠償問(wèn)題，保護(hù)合同之中守約當(dāng)事人的合法權(quán)益并維護(hù)法律的公平、公正及權(quán)威。完善我國(guó)關(guān)于法定違約解除時(shí)的損害賠償問(wèn)題的研究及規(guī)范，不斷進(jìn)行探討和實(shí)踐，彌補(bǔ)我國(guó)目前立法上的疏漏及缺陷，才能維護(hù)法律的權(quán)威，使合同解除損害賠償制度發(fā)揮更大的經(jīng)濟(jì)效益和社會(huì)效益。 本文除引言和結(jié)語(yǔ)部分外，正文部分共分為三章，第一章為合同解除的溯及力，第二章為合同解除與損害賠償?shù)牟⒋骊P(guān)系，第三章為合同解除時(shí)損害賠償?shù)姆秶�。第一章先從合同解除的基礎(chǔ)理論著手，對(duì)合同解除的溯及力問(wèn)題進(jìn)行了研究，分別對(duì)關(guān)于合同解除的溯及力的“直接效果說(shuō)”“間接效果說(shuō)”“折衷說(shuō)”及“清算關(guān)系說(shuō)”這四種學(xué)說(shuō)進(jìn)行了探討。對(duì)我國(guó)《合同法》對(duì)合同解除溯及力的規(guī)定做出分析，闡述了該規(guī)定闡釋的區(qū)分說(shuō)所引起的爭(zhēng)論，并從立法價(jià)值和解決實(shí)際問(wèn)題的角度提出自己的觀點(diǎn)。第二章對(duì)合同解除與損害賠償?shù)牟⒋鎲?wèn)題進(jìn)行分析，先對(duì)于目前理論界存在的不同學(xué)說(shuō)進(jìn)行簡(jiǎn)要的闡述，包括選擇主義和并存主義，而并存主義又稱為兩立主義，其立法理由存在履行利益說(shuō)和信賴?yán)嬲f(shuō)。然后結(jié)合我國(guó)的規(guī)定分別從權(quán)利保護(hù)、公平正義及實(shí)踐檢驗(yàn)的角度對(duì)合同解除和損害賠償并存的價(jià)值進(jìn)行了詳細(xì)地闡述。第三章對(duì)法定違約解除時(shí)的損害賠償范圍進(jìn)行分析，首先闡述了合同的利益構(gòu)造問(wèn)題，對(duì)比了英美法系及大陸法系的不同規(guī)定。然后對(duì)履行利益是否應(yīng)包含進(jìn)法定違約解除時(shí)的損害賠償范圍這一爭(zhēng)論焦點(diǎn)進(jìn)行闡述，并重點(diǎn)分析筆者認(rèn)為履行利益損失應(yīng)被包括在賠償范圍之內(nèi)的理由，在履行利益應(yīng)被賠償?shù)挠^點(diǎn)基礎(chǔ)上闡述了應(yīng)當(dāng)對(duì)履行利益賠償所進(jìn)行的限制。
[Abstract]:The contract Law of our country prescribes generally how to compensate for the loss when the contract is terminated, which leads to the controversy in the field of legal theory. In the practical operation of the actual rescission of contract, the result of "different judgments in the same case" appears because of the different standards, which damages the interests of the parties to the contract, the legal authority and the judicial justice. From the retroactive effect of contract rescission, the coexistence of contract termination and damage compensation, and the determination of the scope of damage compensation at the time of legal breach of contract, this paper probes into the problem of compensation for damages at the time of legal breach of contract. In order to straighten out the relationship between the termination of the contract and the compensation for damages in the case of unclear provisions of the law, and better solve the problem of compensation for damages when the legal breach of contract is dissolved in theory and practice, Protect the lawful rights and interests of the parties to the contract and maintain the fairness, justice and authority of the law. In order to maintain the authority of the law, we should perfect the research and regulation on the issue of compensation for damages caused by legal breach of contract in our country, continue to discuss and practice, and make up for the omissions and defects in our current legislation, so as to maintain the authority of the law. Contract rescission damages system to play a greater economic and social benefits. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, the text is divided into three chapters: the first chapter is the retroactive effect of contract rescission, the second chapter is the coexistence of contract rescission and damage compensation, the third chapter is the scope of damage compensation when the contract is terminated. The first chapter starts with the basic theory of contract rescission and studies the retroactive effect of contract rescission. This paper probes into the four theories of "direct effect", "indirect effect" and "compromise" and "liquidation relationship" about the retroactive effect of contract termination. This paper makes an analysis of the retroactive effect of contract rescission in contract Law of China, expounds the controversy caused by the interpretation of the stipulation, and puts forward its own viewpoint from the angle of legislative value and solution of practical problems. The second chapter analyzes the coexistence of rescission of contract and compensation for damages. First of all, it briefly expounds the different theories existing in the field of theory at present, including selectivism and coexisting doctrine, which is also called two-stand doctrine. The legislative reasons are the theory of fulfilling interest and the theory of trust interest. Then the value of rescission of contract and compensation for damages are expounded in detail from the angle of protection of rights, fairness and justice, and practice test in combination with the provisions of our country. The third chapter analyzes the scope of damages when the statutory breach of contract is dissolved. Firstly, it expounds the interest structure of the contract, and compares the different provisions between the common law system and the civil law system. Then the focus of the debate on whether performance interests should be included in the scope of damages at the time of legal breach of contract is expounded, and the reasons why the loss of performance interests should be included in the scope of compensation are analyzed. On the basis of the viewpoint that the performance interest should be compensated, this paper expounds the limitation of the performance interest compensation.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：中國(guó)社會(huì)科學(xué)院研究生院
【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10條

1 崔建遠(yuǎn);吳光榮;;我國(guó)合同法上解除權(quán)的行使規(guī)則[J];法律適用;2009年11期

2 林宏堅(jiān);曾祥生;;論合同解除后的損害賠償[J];法律適用;2010年09期

3 徐夢(mèng)野;;合同解除后的損害賠償問(wèn)題[J];法制與經(jīng)濟(jì)(中旬刊);2011年07期

4 王亞明;;合同解除損害賠償問(wèn)題探討[J];湖南工程學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2006年04期

5 韓世遠(yuǎn);根本違約論[J];吉林大學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);1999年04期

6 何國(guó)強(qiáng);;合同解除損害賠償范圍之比較研究[J];武漢交通職業(yè)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2012年02期

7 王長(zhǎng)發(fā);合同解除效力形態(tài)的價(jià)值選擇研究[J];黑龍江省政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2005年01期

8 梁彤;黃渝景;;合同解除與違約責(zé)任——從概念邏輯到司法邏輯[J];求索;2007年02期

9 蔡立東;論合同解除制度的重構(gòu)[J];法制與社會(huì)發(fā)展;2001年05期

10 崔建遠(yuǎn);解除權(quán)問(wèn)題的疑問(wèn)與釋答(下篇)[J];政治與法律;2005年04期

本文編號(hào)：2394041