不安抗辩权论文：《合同法》不安抗辩权与预期违约制度之辨析

发布时间：2020-03-03 06:28:35 来源：范文大全收藏本文下载本文手机版

【中文摘要】现代社会瞬息万变,对于那些不能即时履行的合同,在有效成立后至履行期到来前,有可能出现很多无法预测的新情况新变化,而使得合同到期无法或难以履行。同为保护合同债权期待而设置的法律制度,不安抗辩权和预期违约各自在大陆法系及英美法系中发挥着举足轻重的作用。我国虽属大陆法系,但1999年颁布的《合同法》在第6

8、69条和第94条第2款、第108条中创造性地吸收、借鉴了大陆法系不安抗辩权制度以及英美法系预期违约制度的精华,将分属于不同法系的两种制度融合于一部法律之中,形成了具有中国特色的期前救济规则。这在进一步防范合同风险,保障交易安全以及维护当事人的权益等方面的确具有积极意义。但自从合同法颁布后,学界褒贬不一,对其的争论亦从未停止过。本文以从理论的完整性和逻辑的合理性上厘清我国《合同法》中的不安抗辩权及预期违约制度为,首先,结合历史考证法,分别对两种制度进行了系统研究,包括它们的内涵、价值理念、在立法或判例上的发展等,并对它们各自的适用条件以及相应的救济规则做出总结归纳。其次,主要运用比较研究的方法考察两种制度之间的异同,指出作为分属不同法系、继承不同法律传统的两种制度,尽管有些形似,事实上却在价值理念、具体制度、表现形式等方面具有质的区别。再次,结合《合同法》的规定,对我国该种体系安排是否合理妥当进行分析评价。最后,在分析学者们争论的焦点问题基础上,指出我国《合同法》相关规定的不足并就如何进一

步完善提出建议,即,我国《合同法》完全可以通过对不安抗辩权制度本身以及与之密切相关的制度,如给付不能、大陆法上的拒绝履行制度、合同法定解除制度等的调整,从内外两方面克服传统不安抗辩权制度的大部分缺陷。从而在回归大陆法系传统的同时,通过完善现行立法以及配套的司法解释,采纳预期违约制度的合理因素,取长补短,既发挥两种制度应有的作用,同时避免冲突和矛盾,从而更有效地保护合同双方的利益,起到保障交易安全、提高交易效率的作用,并在司法实践中避免理解和运用上的混乱。

【英文摘要】In face of such a modern society that varies from minute to minute, for those non-instant contracts, from the effective establishment to the arrival of performance period, there may be many unpredictable new changes, which lead to impoibility or difficulty to fulfill the contract.As two legal systems set for the protection of creditor’s rights, the unsafe right of defense and anticipatory breach of contract play decisive roles in the continental law system and Anglo-American law system respectively.Although our country belongs to continental law system, China’s “contract law” iued in 1999 creatively absorbs the eence of unsafe right of defense in the continental law system and the anticipatory breach of contract in Anglo-American law system, and provides these two kinds of regulations which belong to different legal

systems in one law.Therefore it formed rules of anticipatory breach with Chinese characteristics.It’s favorable for prevent contract risk, ensure trade safety and protect interests of the parties.But since the contract law came into effect, the controversy has never stopped.In order to clarify the unsafe right of defense and anticipatory breach in China’s “contract law”, the author will firstly analyze the concept, the theoretic value and the development of the two regulations, and meanwhile, give a summary on their conditions of application and corresponding remedy rules.Secondly, give a research on the similarities and differences of the two kinds mainly by the method of comparison, and point out that as belong to two different legal systems and have succeion of different legal traditions, although have some similar, the two actually have qualitative distinction in the value idea, system, form and other aspects.Then, combined with the “contract law”, give an evaluation on the rationality of the system arrangement.Lastly, on base of analyzing the focus of arguments, the author point out the inadequate of the relevant provisions in China’s “contract law” and make his own suggestions on improvement.That is, by adjusting the system of unsafe right of defense itself and other relevant rules as Impoibility of Performance,

Repudiation in continental law system, Legal Resciion of Contracts and so on, China’s “contract law” can overcome most of the defects in Unsafe Right of Defense from inside and outside.Through the improvement of legislation and the adoption of the reasonable factors in the system of anticipatory breach, it can return to civil law tradition, put both two kinds of systems into full play and avoid the conflicts and contradictions at the same time.So that we can further protect the interests of both parties, improve transaction security and efficiency, and avoid the confusion of understanding and usage in the legal practice.【关键词】不安抗辩权预期违约合同法

【英文关键词】unsafe right of defense anticipatory breach contract law 【备注】索购全文在线加好友

：139938848

.同时提供论文写作一对一指导和论文发表委托服务

【目录】《合同法》不安抗辩权与预期违约制度之辨析4-6Abstract6-7

序言10-1

1摘要

第一章不安抗辩权制度解析11-1912-1

4第一节不安抗辩之内涵及其价值理念

二、不安抗

一、不安抗辩权的概念及渊源12-1

313-14辩权制度的价值理念第二节传统理论上不安抗辩权的

适用条件及其救济规则14-19