论文部分内容阅读
精神损害赔偿问题在传统的理论上被认为是侵权损害赔偿与违约损害赔偿的重要区别。另外,由于我国合同法确立了责任竞合的有关规则,在司法解释中又进一步明确了精神损害赔偿的提起要以侵权为由提出,因此反对以违约为由提起精神损害赔偿的声音依然很强大。但在司法实践中,违约精神损害赔偿问题却得到了突破,这表明,违约精神损害赔偿的确立是符合司法实践的,有其现实必要性;另外,违约精神损害赔偿也是有其存在的理论空间的。因此,应当确立违约精神损害赔偿制度。
The issue of compensation for moral damages is traditionally considered to be an important distinction between compensation for damages and damages for breach of contract. In addition, since the contract law in our country has established the relevant rules of competing for responsibility, it further clarifies in the judicial interpretation that the compensation for mental damages should be raised on the basis of infringement. Therefore, the objection to compensation for moral damages based on breach of contract is still very strong . However, in the judicial practice, the issue of compensation for damages for breach of contract has been a breakthrough, which shows that the establishment of damages for breach of contract spirit is in line with the judicial practice, there is an immediate necessity; in addition, damages for breach of contract spirit is also the existence of theoretical space of. Therefore, the compensation system for the spirit of default should be established.