The Study On The Reasonable Period Of The Exercise Of The Right To Terminate The Contract

After the contract comes into effect,if one party violates the obligations of the contract or happen the termination of the contract in the contract, the other party can not achieve the purpose of signing the Contract.Only exercise the right of cancellation can protect the legitimate interests. The right of cancellation is one of The formation right,its exercise effect can be generated that usually do not have to advance through the proceedings.Therefore, the exercise of the right to the right of the parties to the contract will have a great impact on the parties.We Contract law must restrict the exercise of the right,especially the law does not expressly provides or the parties do not agree on the case,exercise the right in the limite of the "reasonable period", so as to achieve the purpose of regulating the abuse of rights.Understanding the legal value of the "reasonable period",uniform the scope in application of the "reasonable period", identify the factors that affect the "reasonable period",can let the reasonable period of time better use in the judicial practice of our country.The first part of this paper mainly discusses the meaning and legal value of the "reasonable period".The "reasonable period" is based on the principle of good faith and is a presumption of a certain period. The "reasonable period" of the significance lies in the setting: Firstly,the reasonable reliance interest of one part who do not have the exercise of the right is based on the long term implied by the person who do not lift the exercise of the right,and he have taken positive measures to continue the performance of the contract.At this time,if the part exercises the right to terminate the contrat will be not fair to the other part. Sencondly, the part who have the exercise of the right do not use his right to propect his interests meaning his failure to management rights to a certain extent.Therefore, the establishment of a reasonable period is to prohibit the abuse of the right and balance the interests of both parties, take into account the efficiency of the market economy,be fairness and justice.The second part of this paper is mainly about the judicial status of the application of the "reasonable period" of the right to terminate the contract in our country and summarize the focus of controversy.Now the current focus of judicial practice is the scope of application and identification standard.Firstly,the scope of application of the controversial focus is that if there is not a reminder, whether to use the reasonable period of time and appeares “applicable and not applicable" two rules of judgment in practice.Secondly,the focus controversy of the identification of the standard mainly is divided on rules of judgment.There are four rules:applicates by analogy-application of law in the trial of commercial housing sale contract,applicates the limitation of action,applicates the period of exclusion,concretiy analysis the actual situation of the case,and so on.The third part of this paper focuses on the solution according to the relevant focus of controversy.By describing the relationship between the behavior of interpellation and the applicable scope of "reasonable period" to discuss the legitimacy of the expansion of the scope of "reasonable period".At the same time, the author thinks that we should return to the case to discuss,combine with the specific circumstances of the case to analysis,seeking the factors that may affect the determination of "reasonable period".The fourth part of this paper focuses on the perfecting the "reasonable period" of the right to terminate the contract of our country.Uniform the scope in application of the "reasonable period", identify the factors that affect the "reasonable period",and then make recommendations on improving the relevant laws and regulations of the "reasonable period".The significance of the interpellation is merely to urge the other party to quickly and reasonably exercise his rights or fulfill his obligations,but can not reverse inference.When there are loopholes in the law,reasonable analogy can be applied:using the right of revocation to limit the exercise of the right of cancellation.Through making analysis and summary of relevant cases in our country, the author thinks under the circumstances of the urge to interpelle,three months can be used as an ideal mechanism of time;under the circumstances of the urge not to interpelle,we need to consider the relationship between the parties, the value of the subject matter, the status of the contract and other factors and consider the reasonable reliance interest of the non- right person.what's more, the author thinks that only fill legal loopholes, can we solve the problem of the law applicable radically.