The Applicable Requirements Of Unrealization Of The Objective Of Contract Of Article 94 Of Contract Law

The fundamental breach of contract system originated in the United Kingdom and was widely used in Anglo-American law countries and international conventions.Although there is no concept of fundamental breach of contract,the legal system of land has adopted a similar system to that of fundamental breach of contract in legislation,namely the statutory dissolution system.The system of fundamental breach of contract has been formed in a system of judging the severity of default results as a criterion.The CISG adopted a system of fundamental breach of contract and its definition,but also incorporates the relevant system of civil law.On the one hand,the seriousness of the consequence of default is the basic criterion of whether or not it constitutes a fundamental default,which requires that the default must cause substantial damage to the observer,and in fact deprives the observant of the expected contractual benefits.As a condition of limitation,the observant party should be predictable for the result in case of the cancellation of the contract caused by unforeseeable serious consequences.On the other hand,the fundamental breach of contract is divided into the anticipatory breach of contract system,the implementation of impatience,delay and incomplete performance of the four cases,the final formation of Article 25 as the core breach of contract remedy system,to a large extent,promoted the fundamental breach of contract systemdevelopment of.CISG has a positive impact on the formulation of the Contract Law in our country.In the formulation of statutory dissolution of the relevant provisions,China’s "Contract Law" refers to the CISG on the fundamental breach of contract provisions,draws on its objective evaluation of the fundamental breach of contract,the seriousness of the consequences of breach of contract as a precondition for the termination of the contract,although not directly use the notion of "fundamental breach of contract" but provided for a similar concept of "failure to achieve contractual purpose".The concept of "the purpose of the contract" corresponds to "what is expected to be obtained under the contract" in the CISG;at the same time,it abandons the subjective judgment of the Convention on the predictability of the consequences of a fundamental breach of contract and reduces the interference of subjective criteria whether the resulting determination constitutes a fundamental breach of uncertainty.In the process of applying the law for several decades,the understanding of the purpose of the contract in our country’s legal jurisdiction has gone through a narrow-to-wide process of development,from the initial confinement of the contractual purpose to the economic benefit to the present including the spiritual interest,expected benefits,rights enjoyed,etc.,gradually with the interpretation of the Convention.This article is divided into four chapters.The first chapter introduces the problems in the basic breach of contract law of our country,mainly because the concept of the purpose of the contract is too ambiguous,the various types of obstructions are not detailed enough and the operability is not strong.In this chapter,I elaborate the existing legislation and put forward two solutions.The first way is based on abstract judgment criteria,and the second way is based on specific judgment criteria.And I will analyze what combination mode is more maneuverable and more suitable for our country in the following.At present,only the provisions of the CISG are the most completive.Therefore,I would like to refer to the two aspects of fundamental breach in CISG.The content ofthe second chapter is based on specific criteria,adhering to the mode of obstructions of the civil law system and dividing the fundamental default into four categories:non-performance,refusal to perform,delay in performance,and incomplete fulfillment.What the Convention incorporates between the Continental Law System and the Anglo-American Law System lies is that,on the one hand,it stipulates the abstract judgment criteria for fundamental breaches,and on the other hand,it draws on the characteristics of the obstructions of the civil law system,enumerating four aspects of fundamental breaches in non-performance,refusal to perform,delay in performance,and incomplete fulfillment.Some of these specific criterias have important reference values for the improvement of relevant regulations in China.The third path is mainly to analyze the constitutional elements of the fundamental breach of Article 25 of CISG to improve the contractual status of the statutory discharge in China.The objective elements of a fundamental breach include the subsequent substantive damages and the actual deprivation of expected contractual benefits.In this chapter,I combines Professor Schlechtriem’s commentary,foreign scholars’ thesis,and Article 25 related cases.The damage shall include all the unfavorable consequences that will actually occur in the future due to the breach of contract.In addition to the monetary losses,it may also include the loss of intangible assets,loss of goodwill,etc.The expected contractual benefits need to be judged on a case-by-case basis,but the two parties must be aware of the contract benefits from the terms of the contract or the previous consultation.In fact,deprivation of damage claimed by the victim can not be compensated by such measures as price cuts,repairs and so on.As for the subjective elements,I think there is no need to use the predictable rules,because our country’s contract law to follow the overall non-negativity.The fourth part is mainly discussing in the delay in performance,and incomplete fulfillment.This part is to regulate some of these specific standards and discuss the boundary issues,and briefly discuss the uniqueness of service contracts and the application of various cancellation rights.This article believes that China’s current legislative model for the right to statutory rescind should take in the specific judgment criteria,and adopt the abstract judgment criteria as the miscellaneous provisions.Therefore,in the second and fourth chapters of the article,I made some suggestions about the judgment of "the purpose of the contract cannot be achieved" and the loopholes in the existing law.