Liability For Breach Of Contract

In 2012,the Supreme People's Court first stipulated the concept of precontract in the Interpretation of Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in Trial of Dispute Cases Involving Sales and Purchase Contracts,which determined that the liability for breach of a contract is applicable to breach of a precontract,but it is only a general declaration on the liability for breach of a precontract.This interpretation didn't answer such questions that need to be clarified in the practice of trail—for example,whether the liability for breach of a precontract include continued performance,i.e.whether the contract is forcibly concluded,and whether the scope of compensation for damages is reliance interest or performance interest.Besides,it didn't answer such questions as whether it includes compensation for opportunity loss.As a result,in judicial practice,there is no effective legal basis for the settlement of disputes over precontracts,and standards in the actual judgment of the court vary from each other.In December 2019,when the legislators enacted the Contract Part of Civil Code,they made the provisions of the precontract more simple and vague,and they did not respond to the problems that had been fully exposed in the judicial practice.However,it is the only way to unify the judgment rules to standardize the construction of precontracts.Therefore,this paper tries to discuss the liability for breach of a precontract based on the actual cases in recent year.This paper consists of three parts:The first part of the first chapter clarifies the concept and characteristics of precontracts,and briefly describes the reasons for the existence of them.The second part points out the core issues in the remedy of breach of a precontract—the inconsistency in the theoretical views of a precontract,namely,the problem of continuous performance and the scope of damages.The first part is mainly to elaborate the basis of this paper.First of all,it put forward questions,further deepening the understanding of precontract.The second chapter expounds the main theories about the confirmation of the validity of a precontract and analyzes the connotation,advantages and disadvantages of the four theories.Because the confirmation of appointment validity and the choice of liability for breach of appointment theory are in the same line,it is necessary to analyze the theory of the confirmation of the validity in detail,which can lay the foundation for the selection of the theory of the responsibility for breach of a precontract.The third chapter analyzes the core issue of this paper—the difference of the remedy method of the breach of a precontract,and conducts analysis from two perspectives,namely,whether to continue to perform the precontract and the scope of the liquidated damages for the breach of a precontract.Combining with the cases in practice,it lists the reasoning in the court judgment,analyzes the rationality of each point of view,and finally gives my own point of view.