我国民法理论界一般认为,合同债权的效力仅存在于特定的债权人和债务人之间,它是一种相对权。由于合同债权是种相对权,故不能成为侵权行为的客体,因为侵权行为的客体只能是诸如财产所有权、知识产权、人身权三类的绝对权。但在现实经济活动中,第三人侵害合同债权致使债权人遭受损失之现象时有发生,将合同债权排斥于侵权法之外,不利于债权人利益的保护,也不利于社会经济秩序的稳定。为给司法实践提供法律依据,有必要吸收英美判例中的有关侵害合同债权的合理规定,在将要制定的统一合同法中对侵 Civil law circles in our country generally believe that the validity of the contractual claims only exists between the specific creditor and the debtor, it is a relative right. As the contractual claims are kind of relative rights, they can not be the object of infringement because the object of infringement can only be the absolute right such as property ownership, intellectual property rights and personal rights. However, in real economic activities, the third party infringes on the contractual claims and causes the loss suffered by the creditors from time to time. Excluding the contractual claims from the law of infringement is not conducive to the protection of the interests of creditors nor to the stability of social and economic order. In order to provide the legal basis for the judicial practice, it is necessary to absorb the reasonable provisions of the Anglo-American case on the claims against the contract, and in the unified contract law that will be formulated,