论文部分内容阅读
合同责任体系的构建方式主要有两种:一种是以大陆法系的“原因途径”(Cause Approach),一种是以英美法系“补救手段途径”(Remedy Approach)。同时两大法系在救济手段上也有明显的差异。本文通过比较分析后认为,英美法系的“补救手段”为违约补救体系及其具体救济手段更具合理性。我国现代合同法所确立的合同责任体系和救济体系借鉴了两大法系的许多制度,形成了自己的特色,但仍存在着很多不完善之处。
There are two main ways to construct the contract responsibility system: one is based on the “Cause Approach” of the civil law system and the other is on the Anglo-American legal system “Remedy Approach.” At the same time, the two legal systems also have obvious differences in the means of relief. After comparative analysis, this paper argues that the “remedies” of Anglo-American legal system are more reasonable for the breach of contract remedy system and its specific remedies. The contract responsibility system and relief system established by the modern contract law of our country draw on many systems of the two legal systems and form their own characteristics. However, there are still many imperfections.