契約解除前後之危險負擔

The Burden of Risk before and after Rescission

林軒鋒(LIN HSUAN-FENG)

指導教授 ： 游進發

國立臺北大學/法律學院/法律學系法律專業組/碩士(2015年)

摘要

危險負擔，是契約法的重要問題之一。所謂危險負擔，文獻上多以不可歸責於契約雙方當事人之情形為其前提。惟為觀察出具有整體觀意義的危險負擔，本文不再以不可歸責於雙方當事人為限，作為討論之前提。

本文認為，觀察契約當事人間之危險負擔，應先確定契約當事人之給付義務為何，進而探討其所負之給付義務是否會陷於給付不能。確定給付義務會陷於給付不能後，再進一步觀察給付不能會產生如何之不利益效果，以及該不利益效果，是否會透過其他手段進行推移，最終承擔著該不利益效果之人，就是負擔危險之人。

觀察得出具有整體觀意義的危險負擔之後，本文希望以先前所分析得出的結果，作為工具，檢討我國民法之相關規定，是否恰當。包括損害賠償請求權是否應以可歸責作為發生要件、契約解除權之發生，是否應以可歸責為必要，以及民法第262條關於契約解除權消滅之規定，是否妥當。結論上，本文認為，應維持以可歸責作為損害賠償請求權之發生要件、不應以可歸責作為契約解除權之發生要件、民法第262條關於契約解除權消滅之規定，並不甚妥當。

關鍵字

契約解除 ； 危險負擔

並列摘要

The burden of risk is an important issue of contract law. Majority opinion premised on both of parties are innocent. In order to figure out the burden of risk with integral view, this thesis does not premise on it anymore.

This thesis tries to figure out the burden of risk with integral view by following steps: firstly, to make sure what debt the parties to the contract have to perform. Secondly, to make sure whether there will be impossibility of performance or not, and then to survey what disadvantages may occur. Finally, to trace whether it will shift to the other party by other methods or not. The person who ultimately takes the disadvantages is the person who bears the risk.

After figuring out the burden of risk with integral view, this thesis tries to review the relevant sections of our civil code including whether the culpability is essential to the damages claim and the right to rescission of contract, in addition to the adequacy of section 262 regarding the loss of right of rescission by means of the result which has been mentioned earlier. In conclusion, this thesis tend to remain the culpability as a requirement to the damages claim and not to the right to rescission of contract. Additionally, The section 262 regarding the loss of right of rescission is not adequate.

並列關鍵字

the burden of risk ； rescission

參考文獻

王澤鑑，民法思維與民法實例，自版，1999年。

楊仁壽，法學方法論，自版，2005年。

駱永家，民事訴訟法Ⅰ，自版，1999年。

吳從周，民法上之法律漏洞、類推適用與目的性限縮，東吳法律學報，第18卷第2期，2006年12月。

姚志明，營建工程承攬契約定作人協力義務之性質──評最高法院九十九年台上字第一○九六號民事判決，月旦裁判時報，第6期，2010年12月。