第三人的原因造成违约时的责任分配论

The Distribution of Liability When the Third Party Causes the Breach

狭义的履行辅助人、占有辅助人、执行辅助人/事务辅助人均不具有独立的人格,其行为被划归合同当事人的行为,因此,在合同履行和违约的领域,他们均非第三人,其行为造成合同当事人违约,不应或不宜适用《中华人民共和国民法典》第593条规定。具有独立人格的第三人的原因造成合同当事人违约,才属于《中华人民共和国民法典》第593条调整的范围。其法律后果,在法律设有明文规定时依其规定,在当事人有约定且不存在无效原因的情况下依其约定,在合同当事人对违约的造成也有过错时必然成立违约责任。除此而外,具有独立人格的第三人的原因属于通常事变,违约的当事人是否因此免责需要区分情形而定。在债务人履行债务以第三人的作为或不作为为前提或基础或条件的背景下,应当认定债务人可以预见第三人的原因对履行合同的影响,债务人对因第三人的原因造成违约应向债权人承担违约责任。在债务人履行债务不以第三人的作为或不作为为前提或基础或条件的背景下,第三人的原因构成介入原因/中断原因,它“中断”了债务人的行为与债权人受损之间的因果关系,故债务人不向债权人承担违约责任。

In the narrow sense,the auxiliary person for performance,the auxiliary person for possession,the auxiliary person for execution/the auxiliary person for affairs do not have independent personality,and their behavior is classifed as the behavior of the parties to the contract.Therefore,in the field of contract performance and breach,they are not the third party,whose behavior causes the parties to breach the contract,and the provisions of Article 593 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China should not be applied.Only when a third party with independent personality causes a contract party to breach the contract,it falls within the scope of Article 593.The legal consequences of the breach shall be defined in accordance with the provisions of the law,in accordance with the provisions of the parties to the contract and in the case of no invalid cause,and in accordance with the provisions of the contract when the parties are also at fault for the breach of contract.In addition,the reason for the third party with independent personality belongs to common events,and whether the parties in breach of contract are exempt from liability depends on the situation.Under the background that the debtor's performance of the debt is based on the act or omission of a third party,it should be recognized that the debtor can foresee the influence of the third party's cause on the performance of the contract,and the debtor should bear the liability for breach of contract to the creditor.Under the background that the debtor's performance of the debt does not take the act or omission of the third party as the premise or basis or condition,the cause of the third party constitutes the cause of intervention/cause of interruption,which"interrupts"the causal relationship between the debtor's behavior and the creditor's damage,so the debtor does not bear the liability for breach of contract to the creditor.