The Liability For Breach After Contract Rescission

There is considerable controversy about Liquidated damages is punitive and compensatory in civil law theory, the article 97 of "Contract Law" has not explicitly stated whether the termination of the contract, including claims for breach of contract. These conflicts led to the judicial practice there is a big difference on whether the contract is terminated after the breach of contract and breach of contract claims are calculated. With the development of market economy, because one party breaches the contract is terminated after the other leads to sue for breach of contract claims to produce a large number of disputes. In this paper, together with the share purchase dispute case analysis, combined with relevant theory, after the termination of the contract breach of commitment of the sort, and put forward the principles of the recommendations by the judicial process.The first part of this article describes the basic facts of the case and concluded that the focus of controversy in three cases. The second part of the focus of controversy surrounding the case, expand the discussion, The two sides are due to a unilateral breach of contract cause reason to cancel the contract; Finds the two sides agreed the terms are not part of the equity transfer of the donation contract, which is part of the proceeds shall be returned; analyz The effectiveness of the two sides agreed to the terms of fixed-income investments; According to the theory, and finally the actual case can be considered after the termination of the contract for breach of contract claims. After the third part of the fixed-income investment returns and finds that the terms of termination of the contract assume liability for breach of judicial practice recommendations.