论文部分内容阅读
惩罚性违约金具备适用的合理性,主要体现在约定违约金数额高于实际损失,与实际履行、损害赔偿等违约救济方式并存等情形。《合同法》第114条第2款、第3款规定致使违约金兼具赔偿性与补偿性的双重特征,但第2款实际上阻断了惩罚性的实现,因而惩罚性违约金的地位仍处于不确定状态。违约金应当以赔偿性为原则,同时兼顾“惩罚性”在特定情形下的应用,并有必要完善第114条的相关规定。
Punitive damages are applicable to the reasonableness, mainly reflected in the contract amount of liquidated damages higher than the actual loss, and the actual performance, compensation for damages and other forms of co-existence of relief remedies. Article 114, Paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Contract Law provide that liquidated damages are both compensatory and compensatory. However, Paragraph 2 actually blocks the punitive realization and hence the status of punitive damages Still in an uncertain state. The liquidated damages should be based on the principle of indemnity, taking into account the application of “punitiveness” under certain circumstances and the necessity to perfect the relevant provisions of Article 114.