Study On The Liability For Breach Of Pre-Contract

The essence of the precontract is a kind of contract.The Contract law of our country has no specify provisions precontract.It is only involved in the relevant judicial interpretations.The Supreme People's Court promulgated the Sale Contract Interpretation,the article 2 initially proposed the precontract and the liability.But the provision is too general,not to specify the specific form of liability for breach of contract contract.There is a lot of controversy in theory and the same cases often produce different results in judicial practice.Therefore,it is not only rich in theory,but also can guide the practice to conduct an in-depth study on the liability for breach of contract.This article is divided into three parts to discuss the precontract breach liability:The first part is about the legislation,judicial status and existing problems of the contract breach responsibility in our country.First of all,from the legislative point of view,China's provisions on the legal liability of the precontract has not formed a comprehensive and standardized system.Only by two judicial interpretations is too thin,it is difficult to deal with the complicated contract disputes in real life.Secondly,through searching,screening and comparative analysis of practical cases about China's precontract of liability for breach of precontract,we can find that the contract liability for breach of contract disputes mainly focus on the contract can enforce the contract and the scope of the contract breach of contract compensation,the referee standards are not uniform.The second part is a comparative study of the liability for breach of precontract.According to the different types of precontracts,American law gives different contracting obligations.The German law is based on the principle of supporting the request of the parties,and allows the consolidation of litigation.Swiss law support to force the way to sign the contract,not allowed to cross the contracting action directly for the actual performance.As for damages,the German courts and the Swiss court both considered that the performance of the interest is also an appointment loss.Through the comparison and analysis of the legal system in Germany,Switzerland and the United States,China should stipulate the precontract in the general law of contract law,and should not limit the scope of application of the contract.The third part is the analysis of the dispute over the liability for breach of contract in our country.An precontract,as a contract,should apply the general principle of contract law,when a default situation occurs,the compliance party may appeal to enforce the contract.The contract is made in the future to prevent the situation from being eliminated.This is the final purpose,and the performance of the contract can be achieved.The scope terest compensation should be the opportunity benefits included,to compensate the non breaching party for various reasons unable to find alternative loss trading opportunity.of compensation for the damage of an precontract shall be limited to the reliance interest.After all,the precontract is different from the contract,the contract entered into an precontract when the specific transaction has not yet produced,there is no interest in the performance.The reliance interest compensation should include the opportunity benefits,to compensate the non breaching party for various reasons unable to find alternative loss trading behavior.