风险负担规则与合同解除
周江洪风险负担规则与合同解除
Risk-assuming Rule and Contract Termination
期刊名称：《法学研究》
期刊年份：
作者：周江洪
单位：浙江大学光华法学院
中文关键词：合同法;风险负担;合同解除
英文关键词：contract law;risk-assuming;termination
中文摘要：
学说和立法草案多有以合同解除制度吸收风险负担规则的主张，在我国司法实践中，两者的交错也带来了法律适用上的困惑。合同解除制度和风险负担规则具有各自的优势领域，解除一元论和并存模式是目前具有代表性的两种制度安排。在我国合同法采并存模式的背景下，风险由债务人负担时可择一适用，但需就解除权期间、清算关系中的诉讼时效、风险负担抗辩等问题作出特别处理。风险由债权人负担时应当否定债权人的解除权。瑕疵给付时的解除与风险负担应适用合同法第148条、第149条的规定，但在立法论上有重新斟酌的必要。持续性合同可类推适用租赁合同的规定或部分解除制度。清算关系中的风险分配可有限制地准用合同法第148条的规定。
英文摘要：
With contract termination no longer needing the elements of imputation cause such as obligor’s fault, the institution of termination becomes one of the systems that release parties from the contract duty. On the other hand, the rule of risk-assuming in the traditional Civil Law can also release obligee from counter-performance. Hence, an interlacing between contract termination and risk-assuming is inevitable. Whether the risk-assuming rules should be brought into the system of termination or not is becoming a problem. The Draft of the Act on the Reform of the Law of Obligations in Germany and the Draft Proposals about the Japanese Civil Code (Law of Obligations) Reform supported the former and deleted the provisions concerning risk-assuming. But the Act on the Reform of the Law of Obligations in Germany supported for the latter in the end. In China, we face the same problem. The Contract Law of PRC has also provided both rules, resulting in the confusion in the judicial practice. The monism of termination rules and the coexistence of both are the two representative models to resolve the problem. In the fields of implication, effect, procedure, application scope and the limitation of period, both similarities and differences exist between risk-assuming rule and contract termination, and each has its strong points. A conclusion is that，if we adopt the monism model, the system arrangement should fill up the blank with the abolishment of the risk-assuming rules, and if not, the application relationship between them should be clarified. As to the interpretation of the Contract Law of PRC, when the risk is taken by obligor, obligee may select risk-assuming rule or contract termination, with the limitation of termination, the limitation in liquidation and the counterplea be dealt in particular. When the risk is taken by obligee, the termination cannot be selected. In the situation of defective performance, §§ 148 and 149 should be applied, with the rationality of § 148 needing further consideration. When otherwise agreed by the parties about risk-assuming, the agreed has priority. The rules of lease contract or partial termination can be applied by analogy in long-term contracts, and § 148 could also be applied by analogy in the risk allocation in liquidation.
全文阅读： 点击下载
