Attribution Of Responsibility On Ineffective Contract

The first part of the basic content of the Ineffective ContractIn judicial practice, the establishment of the contract into effect in the contract with the effectiveness and accountability issues have a role of crucial importance, so the response to both the concept and elements in the strict distinction. From the theory and the various judicial doctrine and the establishment of contract provisions and entry into force will be to distinguish, and thus on this basis to be reasonable is not defined in the contract into effect. The establishment of effective law refers contracts but lack of effective elements of the temporary entry into force of the contract is invalid.Not entered into force in defining a contract basis, arising under different circumstances the type of contract is not effective for resolution to distinguish different types of contracts not entered into force causes, have the condition.Then, according to the existing civil law system of the existing provisions of analysis did not effect the validity of the contract. Contract is neither a valid contract is not effective, nor are invalid contract, do not belong to withdraw from the contract, I believe that the contract is not designated as effective entry into force of the list of pending contracts.The second part of theory on the contractual liability of the Ineffective ContractFirst, the concept of contractual obligations and doctrines, I believe that should be understood in the broadest sense the concept of contracts, on this basis, the contractual obligations throughout the course of the contract occurred; Secondly, the analysis at this stage of the accountability of all types of contracts and convergence. According to the contract development process, the responsibility will be divided into four stages of the contract; Finally, the analysis did not effect the legal status of contractual liability, and analysis of the existing contract does not effect the basic theory of attribution theory. Not entered into force in violation of contractual obligations established understanding of the nature, the academic point of view there are two very different: the first view, said fault liability. The second view, breach of contract said. Obtained by analyzing their effect on the contractual liability is not the nature of some of the views.First of all, I believe that this responsibility must not be the responsibility of belonging to a new type of negligence and breach of contract because the contracting responsibilities in the contract has been good throughout the development stage of the interface, and is a breach of contractual obligations for the first negligence and breach of the Contracting based on a statutory basis for the contractual obligations arising from breach of contract.Secondly, the establishment of liability for breach of contract, the existence of a valid premise, but not force entry into force of the contract is still lack of effective elements, not yet part of a valid contract, so far from constitute a breach of contract. Again, referring to liability for breach of contract caused by the fault of the party because of his contract can not perform or can not be completely fulfilled when, in accordance with law or contractual liability necessary. Only valid contract, the parties to "fulfill", and can appear to perform the contract and that is why the existence of liability for breach of contract on the effective performance of which, and this can be assumed that the validity of the contract is the party liable for breach of the premise. Therefore, the contract is not effective can not be a breach of contract breach.The third part of the basic theory on the liability of the Ineffective ContractThe first phase of the contract into effect the establishment of liability is not premised on the theory of doctrine. Including fault liability that the breach of contract, said that the independent liability, mutatis mutandis, that such contractual obligations is not valid, I believe that fault liability can be said; then the system does not effect the basic principles of contractual obligations, in order to better determine the contract is not effective The basic nature of the attribution of responsibility and other issues, we must determine the entry into force of the contract responsibility system is not applicable in the essential need to follow the basic principles, such as the principle of good faith, freedom of contract principle, the principle of fairness; the final stage of the contract obligation is not effective , the contract is not effective accountability is based on the obligations of the contract not entered into force on stage. Under the principle of good faith, the contract is not yet effective stage fiduciary duty obligations. On this basis, by: keep the contract to promote the smooth entry into force of the contract and the other should be held in accordance with the principle of good faith obligations. Not entered into force in the establishment phase of the contract obligations are relatively independent, in violation of such obligations shall bear the responsibility.The fourth part of the entry into the problem-solving mode of the Ineffective Contract's attribution of responsibility.First, from the protection of relative to elaborate the contract should not effect the principle of liability rules. Contract is not effective is the responsibility of fault liability, it can be in accordance with the "Contract Law" on the parties on the liability for such negligence, the injured party to damages for loss of trust benefit, in addition, the provisions of the law should be flexible to provide the parties have to terminate the contract, then the right to demand compensation for damages.Then, according to the different types of contracts are not effective to build the specific contract is not effective accountability model.