The Study On The Scope Of Compensation For Contracting Fault Liability

Since the 18 th National Congress,the CPC Central Committee,with General Secretary Xi Jinping as the core,has repeatedly stressed the need to vigorously promote the rule of law,establish a sound legal system,improve judicial independence,and strengthen judicial credibility.But the legal system of our country is in the stage of development,we can not deny the existence of some problems,solving these problems is of great significance to promote the construction of a country ruled by law,and the imperfect system of fault in contracting is one of the problems.The original intention of the establishment of the system of fault in contracting is to urge the contracting parties to negotiate the contract according to the principle of good faith,strictly abide by the obligations of the first contract,improve the sense of security of the civil transaction,and ensure the stable development of the market economy.Articles 42 and 43 of China’s contract Law establish the system of fault in contracting,and provide for the compensation of fault in contracting through Article 58 of contract Law and other relevant judicial interpretations.However,the scope of compensation for contractual negligence and the amount of compensation for fault in contracting are rather vague,which leads to the definition of the scope of compensation for disputes over fault in contracting and the corresponding amount of compensation in judicial proceedings.The calculation of the amount without a relatively uniform standard,resulting in the same case against the problem.This will not only affect the legal authority and judicial credibility,but also can not effectively protect the interests of the aggrieved party in the case,and then cause the interests of the parties concerned to be out of balance and lead to social contradictions.Therefore,the text will study from the angle of the combination of empirical and theoretical,find out the problems existing in the judicial practice,and put forward some simple views,and put forward some suggestions.This paper is composed of introduction,text and conclusion.The text is divided into the following four parts:The first part is the statistical analysis of cases and puts forward questions.First of all,we collect a large number of adjudication documents of fault dispute cases in China this year by means of retrieval tools,and make a table by summarizing the adjudication level and regional distribution of the courts that made the adjudication documents,and making statistics on the time of making the adjudication.With the economic development of our country,civilactivities become more and more active,but there are more and more cases of fault disputes in contracting,and the courts of different regions and different levels of adjudication are different in the cases of disputes of fault in contracting.This is also caused by the unclear design of the relevant system in China’s laws.Then select some typical cases for further analysis.Through the analysis of the judgment result and the reason of judgment in the judgment document,it is found that there are many problems in judicial practice in our country,such as the inconsistent definition of the scope of liability compensation for the fault dispute in contracting treaty,and the inconsistency of the calculation method of opportunity cost.The second part analyzes the causes of the problems found in the first part.There are three main reasons why our country can’t form a unified standard for the adjudication of fault in contracting disputes.The first is the reason of legislation,the unclear provisions of our law and related judicial interpretation is an important reason for the problems in judicial practice;Second,there are different value orientations for the interests protected by the fault system of contracting and the effect to be achieved by applying the system of fault of contracting,which leads to the different standards that the judge grasps when he is free to judge.And the Supreme Court’s decisions on the relevant cases are not the same,plus Lack of guidance cases,these factors together caused in the judicial activities of the inconsistent standards of adjudication;Third,other reasons,such as the tremendous changes in the trading environment brought about by the rapid development of the economy,which make the corresponding disputes complex,and have different social and practical environments in different regions,as well as the influence of public opinion on the trial activities.It is also an important cause of existing problems.The third part mainly draws lessons from the view of the academic circles and the methods of dealing with the problem in the judicial practice of various countries,and puts forward some relevant judicial suggestions according to the actual situation of our country.The scope of compensation for contractual negligence damages based on trust interests should include loss of contracting costs and opportunities.On this basis,the reasonableness of bringing them into the scope of compensation and the calculation of contracting cost and opportunity loss are the factors that should be considered.The fourth part mainly discusses some arguments about the scope of compensation for fault liability in the field of contracting fault in academic circles and makes my own point ofview.Debate 1: whether inherent interests should be included in the scope of compensation for contractual negligence liability.Through the research and summary of scholars’ views,the author thinks that it should be included in the scope of compensation for fault liability in contracting.The second argument is whether the compensation for fault liability in contracting should be limited to the benefit of performance.The author’s point of view is the same as that of Professor Cui Jianyuan and other scholars,that is,China’s liability for fault in contracting applies to the situation where the contract is not established,and the interests of performance are discussed under the premise of the formation of the contract,so China should be different from Germany and Japan.The compensation for the liability for fault in contracting is not limited by the performance of interests.