不安抗辩权与预期违约的竞合与界限——兼论我国《合同法》68条与94条的立法优化路径

On Concurrence and Boundary between Unsafe Right of Defense and Anticipatory Breach of Contract and on the Path of Legislative Optimization of Article 68 and Article 94 in China's Contract Law

学界对我国《合同法》创造性地将不安抗辩权制度和预期违约制度的结合争论不止,为解决该争论,我国立法者可在未来对民法典中的合同法一编进行制定的过程中,保持预期违约制度中的解除权与不安抗辩权中的中止权两种救济方式的基础上,将预期违约制度根据当事人是否在期前明确拒绝履行分为明示预期违约、默示预期违约和不安抗辩权,并利用不安抗辩权与默示预期违约的竞合关系为不安抗辩权的解除权设立搭建桥梁,最终建立起不安抗辩权的中止权向默示预期违约的解除权转化的机制,从而使得不安抗辩权制度与预期违约制度在我国的立法上形成一个有机整体。

In the academic circle,there is a debate about the creative combination of the system of unsafe right of defense and the system of anticipatory breach of contract in China's contract Law.In order to solve this dispute,Chinese legislators could divide anticipatory breach into express anticipatory breach of contract,implied anticipatory breach of contract and unsafe defense right according to whether the parties explicitly refuse to perform before the expiry,based on the maintenance of the right of rescission in the system of anticipatory breach of contract and the right of suspension in the right of unsafe defense.Legislators could also establish a bridge for the right of cancellation of unsafe defense by use of the completion and cooperation relationship between the right of unsafe defense and implied anticipatory breach of contract,and finally establish a mechanism for converting the right of suspension of unsafe defense to the right of cancellation of implied anticipated breach,thereby making the system of right of unsafe defense and the system of anticipatory breach of contract form an organic whole in China's legislation.