透過您的圖書館登入
IP:13.58.137.218
  • 學位論文

違約救濟與契約利益分類之經濟分析 --以美國法之學說與實務運作為基礎

The Economic Analysis of Remedies for Breach of Contract and Contract Interests Classification --Based on American Legal Theories and Cases

指導教授 : 王文宇
若您是本文的作者,可授權文章由華藝線上圖書館中協助推廣。

摘要


由於本文之目的,在於欲嘗試以經濟觀點對於法律制度加以分析,因此必須先釐清法律經濟分析其內涵究竟為何,故先對其基本概念作重點介紹。本文希望能找出法律學與經濟學之共通點,以弭平諸多質疑與紛爭。其次,契約法乃規範民商事活動運作之根本大法,相較於其他法領域,與經濟活動有較密切之關聯,以經濟分析的方式對之加以研究,更能顯示出法律經濟分析於研究方法上所具有之優勢。 因此本文將先對於法律經濟分析以及法律經濟分析於契約法領域之應用,分別加以介紹。緊接著,本文將專注於討論法律學與經濟學裡的兩大核心概念:「正義」(justice)與「效率」(efficiency),試圖在「正義」與「效率」兩大概念間尋找聯結點與最佳平衡點。再進一步又回歸到契約法領域,處理契約自由與契約正義之衝突與調和之議題。希望能透過上述之逐步論述,彰顯使用法律經濟分析方法來處理契約法相關議題之正當性與必要性。 本文於接下來之章節,將著重於以經濟觀點的方式切入契約法上「違約救濟」之相關議題。 首先,本文將對契約義務之履行與不履行進行概述,並且對於當事人履約之際,應遵守之最重要行為規範:「誠實信用原則」,進行經濟分析分析。接下來,將簡單比較大陸法下之「債務不履行」與英美法下之「違約」概念,並以英美法為討論之對象,對各項救濟方法進行審視,並就其間所提供之履行或信賴之誘因進行討論,藉以對英美法下所規範之違約救濟方式進行經濟分析,並以資作為我國法之參考。違約責任制度在契約法中居於十分重要的地位,違約責任更是契約法所要解決的核心問題。本文認為,面對諸多違約救濟方式,應在個別情況下,採取較有效率之方式進行救濟,意即違約救濟應提供有效率的誘因。具有效率誘因之違約救濟手段,將使契約雙方當事人,在履行與信賴兩者間,做出最有效率之投資。 進一步基於「損害預防」之觀點,此亦為近年來法律經濟分析的研究重點,本文希望從效率分析之角度切入,來探討「締約與否」與「違約與否」此兩大契約法之核心議題。首先,本文將對「效率違約理論」此一知名議題進行介紹,並且省思此理論所可能具有之缺陷,再分析其是否適合被我國法制所引進。接下來,本文將對於當事人於不同情況下,究竟應否選擇締約始符合經濟效率,此一根本議題進行探討。 緊接著,本文將從Fuller 與Perdue所提出之「契約利益分類理論」出發,首先,即先行介紹Fuller 與Perdue之理論,以規範性分析與描述性分析兩種不同之角度呈現其理論內涵,並點出該理論於各層面所帶來的深遠影響。接著,本文將對我國法下之履行利益與信賴利益理論,與英美法下之期待利益與信賴利益理論分別進行介紹,分析其是如何所受到Fuller 與Perdue理論之影響,並分別探討其相關問題,再嘗試尋求兩者間之關連性。 更進一步,本文將針對Fuller 與Perdue之理論所造成之深遠影響進行反思。首先,進行現代之規範性分析,主要由經濟效率分析之角度進行探討。更進一步進行現代之描述性分析,對美國實務上之諸多案例進行整理歸納。接下來,本文將嘗試以Fuller 與Perdue之理論作為立足點,建立超越該理論之新分類標準,以期能對此相關議題提供一個不同於以往之思考模式。 本文欲強調,透過經濟分析所得出之結論,並不僅是認為現代的經濟分析並不當然支持Fuller 與 Perdue理論所作的違約損害賠償利益分類,更重要的是,現代的經濟分析與Fuller與Perdue理論思考問題之模式有本質上的不同。現代的經濟分析並非從「何等利益該受法律保護」此出發點開始思考問題,「效率」之追求毋寧才是其所關注之重點。因此,損害賠償之焦點應集中在「所欲創造之效應或結果」上,而非拘泥於「所欲保護之利益類型」上。 最後,本文將回歸我國法,希冀能將上述章節所提出之新思考模式,運用到我國契約法上之實務與學說層面。

並列摘要


In this thesis, I try to analyze our legal system from economic perspective. Therefore, the first step is to clarify the meaning and the function of economic analysis of law. This thesis intends to find out the common points in the law and economics. I focus on the analysis of contract law, comparing to other legal categories, is an important part of civil law and has a closer relationship with economic events. Therefore, analyzing the contract law in economic perspective can make the advantages of economic analysis more clear. First of all, this thesis will introduce how economist analyze the issues in law, and how these methods work in contract law. I will focus on the two core concepts of the law and economics –“justice” and “efficiency”, and tries to figure out the balance point between these two values. Through the foregoing analysis, this thesis wants to justify the necessity of the economic analysis in contract law. Secondly, this thesis will analyze the issue of “the remedies for breach of contract” by viewing all the remedies in common law from the economic perspective. I further discuss the incentives for performance which remedies can provide for parties to a contract. Different remedies can provide a variety of different incentives for the parties to a contract, and I consider the most important function of the remedies is to provide efficient incentives. In addition, this thesis will introduce Fuller and Perdue’s“contract interests classification”. In 1936, Lon Fuller and William Perdue published an article “The Reliance Interest in Contract Damages” in the Yale Law Journal. In the history of contract law, and of American legal thought in general, this article stands as a towering classic. It changed forever the way we think about monetary remedies for breach of contract. In particular, most analysis of monetary remedies still begins with Fuller and Perdue’s distinction between the expectation, reliance, and restitution interests. By using normative and descriptive analysis, this thesis wants to show that Fuller and Perdue’s classification is not a convenient way of classifying contract interests. It neither fits well with the economic analysis about the appropriate remedies for breach nor usefully describe the amounts that courts award. In particular, this thesis wants to emphasize that modern economics does not support how Fuller and Perdue classify the remedies. Furthermore, the most fundamental point is that economics does not even approach the question in the same way that Fuller and Perdue did, for economics does not begin by asking what “interest” the law should protect. From an instrumental perspective, the focus of economics is entirely on the effect one wants to produce, not on the “interest” one wants to protect. In conclusion, based on the foregoing argument, I will analyze Taiwanese cases and statutes, and further propose my suggestions.

參考文獻


熊秉元(1999),〈法律的經濟分析:方法論上的幾點考慮〉,《台大法學論叢》,第29卷第1期,頁215-238。
熊秉元(2003),《熊秉元漫步法律》,台北:時報文化。
期,頁197-206。
E. Allan Farnsworth, CONTRACT, Little, Brown and Company (1990).
Nicholas Mercuro, Steven G. Medema, ECONOMICS AND LAW: FROM POSNER TO

被引用紀錄


劉季涵(2014)。行動裝置產業產銷契約問題之研究〔碩士論文,國立臺灣大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2014.10042
李承陶(2012)。從不完整契約觀點論契約法預設規定的設計-以違約賠償相關規定為核心〔碩士論文,國立臺灣大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2012.01774
唐采蘋(2010)。中斷締約責任之損害賠償範圍〔碩士論文,國立臺灣大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2010.02981
楊秋華(2015)。所失利益衡量模式之探討〔碩士論文,國立臺北大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=U0023-1005201615093575

延伸閱讀