摘要
实际履行,指在违约方不履行合同时,合同对方请求或者合同对方要求法院判定其履行合同义务的违约责任方式。大陆法系和英美法系曾对实际履行采取了不同的态度和做法。简单而言,在违约的责任体系中,大陆法以实际履行为原则,以损害赔偿为例外;英美法以损害赔偿为原则,以实际履行为例外。但在现代,两大法系体现出相互融合的趋势。在我国合同法中,实际履行的地位也存在一个转变的过程。在计划经济时期,实际履行原则扮演着重要的角色。这与我国当时的经济体制有关。1999年《合同法》规定违约责任方式时,首先规定了继续履行方式,但实际履行却并没有像立法者所预想的那样起到首要的补救方式的作用,判决承担强制实际履行责任的案件在司法实践中占的比例是很少的。实际履行责任方式的积极作用未尽发挥,这无疑是让人遗憾的,应该引起反思。
要深入了解实际履行的概念,就必须分析实际履行责任方式与实质履行原则、合同法上的实际履行与劳动法上的实际履行、普通合同场合的实际履行与企业破产时合同的实际履行之间的关系。要把握实际履行制度的深层意义,必须明确实际履行所体现的立法价值取向,明确其与私法自治、契约伦理、效率违约、法官自由裁量权之间的关系。实际履行适用条件的框定与障碍的确认,更是实际履行制度的主要内容。文章论述了实际履行适用的各种违约形态与实际履行适用的形式要件,对我国合同法上实际履行制度提出了设计思路。我国建立实际履行制度新体系,应当以私法自治、契约伦理、社会公平正义为主旨,不主张效率违约,并有限制地控制法官行使自由裁量权;实际履行制度的建立与完善首先有赖于民法、合同法等法律中其它相关制度与理论的建立及支持,应不断完善实际履行制度的理论基础,如合同责任、请求权理论与法院强制执行。完善我国的实际履行制度,应首先将实际履行确定为一种普遍的、有其独特优点的救济方法,而并非仅仅是一项象征性、通常得不到满足的要求;在对各种违约形态逐条加以表述时,对其“处理”的部分应包括其是否可适用实际履行方式的内容;应对阻却实际履行的情形予以规定,不应仅仅在法条中表述为“法律或事实上不能履行的情况”,而应当略加细化,将不能实际履行的情况统一规定下来;最后,对请求权人的身份限制与“合理期限”作出规定。
文章对实际履行与私法自治、契约伦理、效率违约、法官自由裁量权之间的
Specific performance means the that when the contract-breaker doesn't perform the contractual obligation,the other party has right to ask for performance or to seek the enforcement from the judge. Various attitudes and practices were adopt in the system of civil law and the system of common law. At a word,in the frame of methods of bearing contractual liability, the system of civil law makes specific performance doctrine,damages exception. On the contrary, the system of common law makes it conversely. But from the traditional theory of specific performance to modernistic practice,the two law systems have a trend of mutual syncretizing. In our contract law,the position of specific performance is fluctuant. The principle of specific performance played a important role in the era of planned economy. It can be attributed to the economic system. In 1999 Contract Law the continue performance method was stipulated for the first time. But after it ,the method hasn't function as the foremost one of remedy in the legal process,which was suspected by the lawmaker. Actually,only a few percents were possessed by the cases of with judgement of enforced specific performance. It's undoubtedly a great pity that the construtive role of the method wasn't bring into play. We should check it out and think it over.If we want to learn the real meaning and scope of specific performance,we must have the ability to analyze the relationships between the method and principle of substantial performance,between the method and the method on labor law,between the method and the method on bankruptcy law. If we want to grasp the deeply significance of specific performance,what we must do is that knowing the embeded value orientation and recognizing the ties of the method and civil voluntariness, the ties of the method and contractual ethic, the ties of the method and efficient breach, the ties of the method and the judge's discretionary. The main content of specific performance system also includes the patterns of applicable requirements for the method and the affirmation to the obstacles. Author launchs discuss upon every form of suitable breachs and the formal demand. Moreover, author delivers a detailed project about the specific performance system of our contract law. In our brand bew
system,we should establish civil voluntariness, contractual ethic, social fairness and justice as the gist of the system. Efficient breach should be withhold. Meanwhile, the judge's diecretionary should be moderately confined. The establishment and integrity of the system depends on the support of other systems within civil law and contract law demense. We should consistently fulfil the theory basis,such as contractual liability,right of claim,enforced process of court. Founding the system in our country,we should ascertain the system as an universal and unique method of relief,other than a symbolic claim which often unmet in practice. In the disserting of every form of breach,whether the method is suitable should be a part in the handling course. Legislation should stipulate the circunstances of withholding application. More detailed circumstances ought to be prescribed as a whole thing,instead of "circumstances in which is hard to perform legally or practically" in law items. At last,we should steat for the identity restriction of claimant and the "reasonable time limit".The essay also includes: systemic argument on the relationships between specific performance system and the values, advance of notion on "the elements withholding the method applicative", and summary of internal obstacles which withhold the method applicative.
引文
[1] 沈达明、冯大同.国际贸易法[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1983.
[2] 高尔森.英美合同法纲要[M].天津:南开大学出版社,1984.
[3] 徐炳.买卖法.[M].北京:经济科学出版社,1991.
[4] 董安生.英国商法[M].北京:法律出版社,1991.
[5] 王家福.民法债权[M].北京:法律出版社,1991.
[6] 沈正明.英美合同法引论[M].北京:对外贸易教育出版社,1993.
[7] 尹田.法国现代合同法[M],北京:法律出版社,1995.
[8] 何美欢.香港合同法[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1995.
[9] 王军.美国合同法判例选评[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,1995.
[10] 王军.美国合同法[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,1996.
[11] 王利明,崔建远.合同法新论·总则[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,1996.
[12] 杨桢.英美契约法论[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1997.
[13] 崔建远.合同法[M].北京:法律出版社,1998.
[14] 叶林.违约责任及其比较研究[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,1998.
[15] 江平.中华人民共和国合同法精释[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,1999.
[16] 江平.民法学[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,1999.
[17] 彭万林.民法学[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,1999.
[18] 全国人大法制工作委员会民法室.《中华人民共和国合同法》立法资料选》[M].北京:法律出版社,1999.
[19] 王利明.违约责任论[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2000.
[20] 魏振瀛.民法[M].北京:北京大学出版社.高等教育出版社,2000.
[21] 罗伯特.霍恩等.德国民商法导论[M].北京:中国大百科全书出版社,1996.
[22] 迈克尔.D.贝勒斯.法律的原则[M].北京:中国大百科全书出版社,1996.
[23] 理查德.A.波斯纳.法律的经济分析[M].北京:中国大百科全书出版社,1997.
[24] A.L_科宾.科宾论合同[M].北京:中国大百科全书出版社,1998.
[25] A.G盖斯特.英国合同法与案例[M].北京:中国大百科全书出版社,1998.
[26] P.S.阿狄亚.合同法导论[M].北京:法律出版社,2002.
[1] 王卫国.论合同的强制实际履行[J].法学研究,1984(3).
[2] 王笑霞.英美合同中的救济方法[J].厦门大学学报(哲社版),1990(2).
[3] 赵宗全.英美法上的合同实际履行研究[J].现代法学,1995,(4).
[4] 成晓霞.论违约责任的替代及其条件——从实际履行到损害赔偿[J].政法论坛,1999,(3).
[5] 刘浩宇.效率违约的价值评析——对我国合同法第110条的再思考[J].河北法学,2000,(2).
[6] 李本本.刍论实际履行[J].行政与法,2000,(5).
[7] 谭玲.实际履行责任及其法律适用[J].现代法学,2000,(10).
[8] 游永斌.论合同的实际履行[J].湘潭大学社会科b学学报,2000,(12).
[9] 刘旭华.合同实际履行的价值重估——兼析对《合同法》第110条的理解[J].兰州大学学报(社会科学版),2002,(30).
[10] 尹小贝.试论效率违约[J].内蒙古社会科学,2002,(3).
[11] 杜颖.物权请求权与债权请求权的趋近——以不作为债务的强制履行为考察点[J].甘肃政法学院学报,2002,(6).
[12] 孟朝艳.浅析实际履行责任[J].前沿,2003,(4).
[1] G. H.Treitel. The Law of Contract, [M]. Sixth Edition, 1983.
[2] Michael H. Whincup. Contract Law and Practice, [M]. 2003.
[1] Brooks, Richard R.W.."Simple Rules for Simple Courts: Specific Performance, Expectation Damages and Hybrid Mechanisms" [J] Northwestern Law & Econ Research Paper No. 02-2; and USC CLEO Research Paper No. C02-5,July 2002.
[2] Lando, Henrik and Rose, Caspar. "The Myth of Specific Performance in Civil Law Countries"[J]. Lefic Working Paper No. 2003-14, November 21, 2003.
