论文部分内容阅读
在预付式消费服务合同中,经营者提供的格式条款载明“消费者单方终止消费,则预付款项不予退还”内容时,其属于我国《合同法》及《消费者权益保护法》规定的格式条款无效情形。如若消费者无正当理由地单方终止消费,并造成服务提供不能履行时,应依服务合同上的价金风险负担规则,肯定经营者继续享有报酬请求权。在合同约定消费者应负受领配合的义务时,消费者拒绝受领的行为同时成立违约责任,在违约损害赔偿范围的划定上,应受可预见性规则、过失相抵规则、减轻损失规则及损益相抵规则的调节。在评价拒绝受领行为的法律效果时,应将价金风险负担与违约责任区分考察,不宜混同。我国司法实践对于请求权基础思维方式的运用,仍然亟待加强。本案裁判虽有较大偏误,但亦有可肯定之处,同时遗留下诸多问题有待将来理论与实践的发展。
In the prepaid consumer service contract, when the format stipulated by the operator states that “when the consumer unilaterally terminates the payment, the prepayment will not be refunded”, it belongs to China’s “Contract Law” and “Consumer Protection Law” The provisions of the provisions of the form of invalid conditions. If consumers unilaterally terminate the consumption without justifiable reasons and cause the service provision to fail to be fulfilled, it shall be affirmed that the operator shall continue to enjoy the right of remuneration in accordance with the rules on the burden of price risk on the service contract. When the contract stipulates that consumers should take the obligation of cooperation, the consumer refuses to accept the act and establishes the liability for breach of contract at the same time. In the delimitation of the scope of damages for breach of contract, the rules of predictability, negligence and loss mitigation And the adjustment of the rules of profit and loss. When evaluating the legal effect of refusing the act of accepting the act of accepting the act, it should not be confused with the distinction between the burden of the risk of gold price and the responsibility for breach of contract. The judicial practice in our country still urgently needs to strengthen the application of the basic thinking method of the right of claim. Although there are some big errors in the case’s adjudication, there are certainty that can be affirmed. At the same time, many problems are left behind for the future development of theory and practice.