论文部分内容阅读
实际履行是违约责任承担中的一种重要的救济手段。在两大法系中的由于历史传统和法律习惯的不同,使得对实际履行责任的规定也有所不同,体现了不同立法意旨和价值追求,究其本质就是效益与公平的矛盾。然而,在两大法系日益融合的大形势下,实际履行这一责任形式面临尴尬的境地,效率违约对其提出了挑战。我国合同法顺承大陆法系的传统,一直把实际履行看作是基本的、首要的救济方式,新合同法虽然做出一些限制,但背后所体现的价值取向还是显而易见的。在法律适用中要从立法者的意图出发,克服成文法和法官权利有限的固有限制,正确运用之。
Actual performance is an important remedy in the undertaking of breach of contract. Due to the difference of historical traditions and legal habits in the two legal systems, the provisions on the actual fulfillment of duties are also different. They embody different legislative purposes and value pursuits. The essence is the contradiction between efficiency and fairness. However, under the general situation of the convergence of the two legal systems, the actual fulfillment of this form of responsibility is embarrassed. The efficiency breach of contract poses a challenge to them. The contract law of our country conforms to the tradition of the civil law system and regards the actual performance as the basic and primary relief method. Although the new contract law makes some restrictions, the value orientation embodied in it is still obvious. In the application of law, it is necessary to proceed from the intention of the legislator to overcome the inherent limitations of statutory law and the limited rights of judges and make proper use of it.