Default Relief On The Non - Damage To Property

In civil law,,the responsibility for relief adopted to the dual system which contains of tort and breach of contract. Tort law was used to protect the vested interest of the parties, while contract law used to protect the expectation interest or the interests of the trust. In a simple commodity society, this system could cover all types of civil liability. However, with the changing times, trading are getting more complex, the binary relief system didn't have sufficiently comprehensive to protect the interests of rights holders. In order to meet social development, most of the countries (regions) have established a non-property damage relief system for breach of contract, which broken the civil liability of the binary relief system in the field of contract law on compensation for non-property damage. China's academic still stick to that tort remedies should be non-property damage.Accompanied with the rise of the theory such as interests of a third party contract, the contracting fault, collateral obligation ,the differences between breach of contract and infringement has become increasingly blurred, and our scholars stick to the difference, denying compensation for non-property damage caused by breaching contract. This view is actually Dogmatism. In practice, China has emerged judges in accordance with fair and just affirming the compensation for non-property damage. Therefore, based on the contradictions of China's legislative and judicial status, and learned from advanced foreign experience, there is a need for an exposition of compensation for non-property damage .This paper attempted to expose principles of contract law such as the expansion of contract obligation, the rule of full compensation ,the expected benefits to prove breach of contract remedies has a legitimate legal basis; analyzed pairs of non-property damage through breach of contract remedies to prove the rationality of its existence.This article argued that China should restrictedly establish the system of compensation for non-property damage caused by breaching contract.In this paper, comparative law study, empirical analysis, the type of analysis method were used.The first chapter was an overview of non-property damage, which briefly defines the concept and scope of non-property damage.Chapter II used the method of comparative. By examining some countries (regions) in the legislation and jurisprudence of compensation for non-property damage , is not difficult to find out countries (regions) have breached through non-property damage not only by the principles of tort relief, but also by modifying the law or jurisprudence, established system of compensation for non-property damage. This is worthy for our reference.Chapter III was the legal analysis, which is the focus of this paper. This chapter exposed principles of contract law such as the expansion of contract obligation, the rule of full compensation ,the expected benefits and the defection of choice of contract liability, discussed the rationality of the compensation for non-property damage. Finally assessed the view of a negative point, confirmed the rationality of compensation for non-property damage caused by breaching contract.Chapter IV was a construction of China's compensation for non-property damage caused by breaching contract.