论迟延违约金的性质及其司法酌减限度——以皇台公司与史文培互易合同纠纷案为例

On the Quality of Delayed Liquidated Damages and its Judicial Mitigation Limit——Taking an Example of Reciprocity Contract Disbutes between Huangtai Company and Shi Wenpei

违约金问题是自由与管制在合同法领域最为突出的角力,而迟延违约金是否能够被视为"惩罚性"违约金,也是学术与实务界的热点问题之一。通过对史文培案的分析,可以梳理出实务界对违约金司法调整的解决路径:其一,一百一十四条中的违约金兼具"补偿性与惩罚性",但并非区分惩罚性违约金与补偿性违约金的依据;其二,违约金可以高于实际损害,但需要视具体情况以免超越限度造成不公平结果。

The liquidated damages issue is the most outstanding wrestling between freedom and regulation in thefield of contract law. Whether the delayed liquidated damages can be seen as＂punitive＂is a hot topic in academicand practical circles. The analysis of the Shi Wenpei case does up the judicial solutions of liquidated damages.Firstly, the liquidated damages in Article 114 has both＂compensatory and punitive＂, but not the basis to distinguishfrom them; Secondly, he liquidated damages can be higher than the actual damages, but specific conditions shouldbe taken into account to avoid unfairness.