论文部分内容阅读
实体法上的“合同履行地”与程序法上的“合同履行地”虽然在基本含义上相同,但在设置前提和立法目的上却迥然各异。程序法上对合同履行地的关注重在解决诉讼管辖问题,以实体法的理念设计程序法的制度极有可能造成逻辑上的悖谬以及“原告就被告”一般性规则的颠覆。新司法解释对合同履行地的规定意在改变特征履行地的传统观念,贯彻争议义务管辖地原则,但这一思路在其规定中并没有得到清楚明确的体现,其对实体法规定的简单套用反而会导致更多的歧义。
The “place of contract fulfillment” in the substantive law and the place of “contract fulfillment” in the procedural law are the same in terms of their basic meanings, but are very different in setting the premise and the purpose of legislation. The focus of procedural law on the performance of contract is to solve the problem of jurisdiction over litigation. The system of procedural law based on the concept of substantive law is most likely to cause logical absurdity and subversion of general rules of plaintiff as defendant. The new judicial interpretation of the contract to fulfill the provisions of the intention to change the characteristics of the traditional concept of fulfillment and implementation of the principle of jurisdiction of disputes, but this idea in its provisions and did not get a clear and definite, its simple application of substantive law It will lead to more ambiguity.