Study On Judicial Practice Of Affirming That "The Purpose Of The Contract Cannot Be Realized"

The Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China(hereinafter called "the Chinese Civil Code ")came into force formally on January 1,2021.The word "purpose of contract" appears many times in the contract part of the Civil Code of China,but the connotation and extension of "purpose of contract" are not clearly stipulated in the provisions,and there are difficulties in its application in judicial practice.General conditions for statutory rescission are stipulated in Section 563 of the Contract in Chinese Civil Code and section 563 of the Contract in Chinese Civil Code took their cue from the provisions of section 94 of the Contract law of the People’s Republic of China,the provision combined and modified the continental law system and Anglo-American law system’s specific provisions about the statutory rescission,take the fundamental breach as the substantive judgment standard,and at the same time try to enumerate the specific forms of breach.Then it created a kind of special legal mode: according to the fundamental default for substantial judgment standard,at the same time try to enumerate the specific construction form of breach.Although there is an expression of "cause to fail to realize the purpose of the contract",there are disputes in theoretical research and application of relevant provisions because the meaning of "cause to fail to realize the purpose of the contract" is vague and there is no specific and detailed description of what is "cause the purpose of the contract cannot be realized".As an important criterion of judgment,"cause the purpose of the contract cannot be realized" plays an important role in the court’s trial of the dispute of statutory rescission of contract.Therefore,it is very important to explore the specific identification of "the purpose of the contract cannot be realized."The purpose of this paper is to through reading a lot of judicative paper,summarizes the Supreme People’s Court’s perspectives and practices about affirming "the purpose of the contract" and " the purpose of the contract cannot be realized",finds the problems in the judicial practice,such as: the logic confusion between behavior and result,the criteria for determining " the purpose of the contract" are vague,the influence factors of the contract purpose in case of delay in performance are fuzzy and so on.In combination with the foreign law and international conventions ′provisions about the purpose of the contract,exploring the shortage of the existing regulations in our country.At the same time,explain the specific interpretation of "the purpose of the contract",the distinction between "contract′s purpose" and "contract′s motive",specify specific criteria for the factors affecting the fulfillment of the purpose of the contract,conclude which factors should be considered when affirming "the purpose of the contract can’t realize",Make suggestions for the current legislation and judicial practice to affirm "the contract cannot be realized".