Determination Method Of Predictability Principle In Liability For Breach Of Contract

In the liability for breach of contract,the principle of predictability,as a restrictive content of the principle of complete compensation,plays a substantive role in safeguarding the interests of both parties and ensuring fairness and justice.However,in China’s legislation,only the foreseeing subject and the foreseeing time point of the principle of predictability are clearly stipulated in the legislation,and there are legal gaps in the interpretation of other guiding elements,resulting in the overhead and rigidity of practical judgments,which cannot fully play the regulatory role of the principle of predictability in the scope of damage compensation.This ambiguity is mainly reflected in three aspects: the application of exceptions to intentional and gross negligence breaches,the determination of typical types of damage in the foreseeable content,and the concretization of the criteria for determining the predictive ability of the breaching party.Exploring the application methods of predictability rules requires starting from raising issues,combining with the analysis of the provisions and legitimacy of the subject and time point of predictability rules in China’s legislation,as well as the rigid legal application issues such as"certainty standards squeezing predictability rules" and "lack of reasons for judgment or rough explanation of" unable to prove "that have emerged in China’s judicial judgments in the past five years,Propose three issues of legislative interpretation deficiencies in the current process of applying foreseeable rules;Next,we will explore the necessity of excluding intentional and gross negligence breaches,analyze and summarize the three types of controversial viewpoints in the current theoretical community,and demonstrate the viewpoint from the perspectives of negative evaluation of the defaulting party,balance of interests,pre allocation of risks,unified legislative system,and the trust of both parties in the transaction that "the foreseeable rules should be excluded from intentional and gross negligence breaches," and explore the limitations on the scope of liability for breach of contract after exclusion;Furthermore,the specific path for determining the predictive ability of the defaulting party is discussed,and it is proposed that consideration should be given to the identity of the contracting parties,place of performance,consideration,nature of the subject matter,and disclosure of special content,in order to better align with the general rational person judgment standard in the application of the rule of predictability;Finally,the issue of establishing typical types of losses in the foresight content is analyzed.The legitimacy of the widely recognized view in China that "foreseeing types of losses rather than amounts is sufficient"is analyzed,and the views of "great possibility of losses occurring" and"roughly having both types of losses and amounts foresight" are questioned from practical operational and normative perspectives.It is also proposed that establishing typical types of losses can result in loss of profits and lost costs Loss of non performance benefits such as lawyer fees.Resolving the above three issues can help clarify the judgment approach,enable judges to have a clearer trial context when applying the rule of predictability,establish more accurate and reasonable judgment basis,and promote the standardized and systematic development of the determination of breach of contract liability.Establish and improve restrictive rules for compensation for damages,ensure clear responsibilities of both parties,rather than adjusting the results solely through macro and general principles of fairness and justice,and seek more scientific and rigorous restrictive rules.The method of determining the predictability rules in determining liability for breach of contract can improve the unity and orderliness of judicial practice trials,reasonably safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of both parties,effectively improve judicial efficiency,and ultimately promote transaction harmony and ensure transaction safety.