On The Composition Of The Principal’s Liability In Article 930 Of The Civil Code

Article 930 of China’s civil code stipulates the compensation liability of the principal,and its main content is inherited from Article 407 of the original Contract Law.The term “demand” for compensation for losses is changed to “request” for compensation for losses,without any substantial change.Considering that there are still some controversies in the theoretical and judicial practice regarding the constituent elements of the principal’s liability,the article takes the imputation principle of the principal’s liability as the research starting point and explores the composition of the principal’s liability.In the legislative example,there are three kinds of imputation principles in the principal liability calculation.Take Japan,South Korea,Chinese Taiwan,and so on as examples to adopt the principle of no-fault liability.Take Swiss law as an example to adopt the principle of presumption of fault.Take Austrian law as an example to adopt the principle of fault liability.As for the original principle of liability attribution for principal in China,starting from the interpretation of meaning,combining compensation theory and danger theory,it should be interpreted as no-fault liability from the perspective of systematization.The significance value of the liability of our principal lies in that it is beneficial for controlling hazards,filling in damage,and emdodying a social centered view of justice.The three elements of the principal’s liability are as follows: the trustee suffers losses,the origin of the loss is due to the entrusted transaction or is related to the entrusted transaction,and the damage to the trustee has an consequential relationship with the execution of the entrusted transaction.Comparing the views of “the establishment of the entrustment relationship equals the establishment of the entrustment contract” and “the establishment of the entrustment relationship does not equal the establishment of the entrustment contract”,it is more reasonable to understand the latter in a broad sense,and the entrustment relationship should be regarded as the basic legal relationship in the constituent elements of the principal’s liability.The liability of the principal can be applied indiscriminately to both gratuitous and paid entrustment.With the entrustment contract as the representative,the key elements of the establishment of the entrustment contract include: the important purpose for others to deal with affairs,the premise of mutual trust between the two parties,and the result of the unscheduled transaction.In this way,the differences between the labor contract,employment contract,contract of employment,agency grant,and management can be further clarified,and exclude applications that do not belong to the entrustment relationship.Referring to the identification standards of “providing labor services” and“execting work tasks”,the identification of entrusted affairs can be abstracted into three theories: subjective meaning theory,appearance standard theory,and internal correlation theory.The scope of entrusted “affairs” includes legal acts,quasi legal acts,and factual acts.The determination of entrusted affairs should adopt the appearance standard theory,and case judgment also needs to comprehensively consider relevant factors.There should be a causal relationship between losses and the execution of delegated transactions.The scope of compensation for losses should include both positive and negative property losses.The legitimacy of non-attributable to fiduciary personnel is reflected from the perspectives of value balance,efficiency principle,and corrective justice.As long as the trustee has performed the general duty of care,the trustee may claim the right to claim damages as long as he asks whether the business has achieved the desired effect and whether the debt has been performed by contract.It fact,there are three,two,or even four theoretical and practical disputes that cannot be attributed to the specific reasons of the trustee,such as the reasons attributable to the principal,the reasons attributable to a third party,and force majeure.It is still necessary to strictly limit the sphere of application of the law and exclude the application of other provisions of the civil code can be applied,and limit it to objective situations such as reasons attributable to a third party,and force majeure.When the reasons attributable to a third party are applicable,the principal is only the intermediate responsible person,and the third party is the final responsible person.The principal has the right to request a third party,and the scope of compensation shall be limited to the actual compensation scope it bears.