论文部分内容阅读
民事责任原则在无效合同与有效合同违约的情况下,并不与民事行为相一致。如甲乙订立了购销合同,若合同有效,乙违约,甲除可获得直接损失之赔偿,还可以要求乙继续履行合同,以防止减少自己的间接损失。若乙不能继续履行合同,甲还可获得间接损失之赔偿;若合同无效,(如乙欺诈)甲只能获得直接损失之赔偿,若要求乙赔偿间接损失则往往被认为于法无据。可见,无效合同欺诈方的主观恶性比有效合同违约方更大,但他在诉讼中的地位反而较后者有利。
The principle of civil liability in the case of a breach of contract and a valid contract, not in line with civil conduct. Such as A and B entered into a sales contract, if the contract is valid, B breach of contract, except for a direct loss of compensation, you can also ask B to continue to perform the contract to prevent reducing their own indirect losses. If B can not continue to perform the contract, A can also be compensated for indirect losses; if the contract is invalid, (such as B fraud) can only be a direct loss of compensation, if B compensation indirect losses are often considered lawless. It can be seen that the subjective viciousness of the invalid contract fraud party is larger than that of the effective contract, but his position in the lawsuit is more favorable than the latter.