过错归责原则的回归——客观风险违约案件裁判归责逻辑的整理与检讨

The Return of Fault-Liability:Review and Reflection on the Logic of Judgment in the Cases of Breach of Contract under Objective Risk

在严格责任立法体系之下,裁判者在适用不可抗力规则于边际案件时所表达的观点,却并非遵循同一原则。对近百件生效裁判文书的具体分析表明,自然力致损场合下,法院判定不可抗力规则是否适用的实质审查要件是以过错为主的,而意外事件、政府具体行政行为等第三人原因导致违约的情形,在有关旅游纠纷、担保纠纷和商品房买卖纠纷的司法解释中已确立免责地位,合同法第121条的限制已被突破,相当一部分无过错债务人均被法院免除了违约责任,真实的裁判逻辑正在向过错归责原则回归。这一合同调整的道德主义倾向应在民法典制定中予以足够重视。

Under the legislation system of 'strict liability',the view point conveyed by judges' application of force majeure for marginal cases didn't follow the same principle. The analysis of hundreds of effective judicial adjudicative documents indicate that,under the condition of damage by the natural forces,the fault is the major factor to refuse to apply the rule of force majeure by the court,w hile the reasons of the third party such as accidents and the specific administrative act by the government have been the limitation of liability on the judicial interpretation about tourism-related disputes,security-related disputes,and the sale of commodity houses' disputes. Since the limitation of Article 121 of the Contract Law has been broken through,quite a number of no-fault debtors w ere released from liabilities for breach of contract,and the real logic of judgment is returning to fault-liability. The tendency of moralism in contract should be given sufficient attention during the legislation of the Civil Code.