Study On The Right Of Objection To The Termination Of Contract After Expiration Of Time Limit

In order to safeguard the equal rights of both parties to the contract,the law establishes the right of objection corresponding to the right of rescission and exercise the time limit of it in judicial interpretation.But because of the different understanding,"formal understanding" and "substantial understanding" both exist in parallel.In practice,"formal censorship" and "substantive censorship" also both exist when different judges hear cases about the right of objection to contract rescission which exceeded the time limit.The main reason for the divergence of practice lies in the different trial standards of judges,which reveals the different focuses on this kind of issues in judicial practice.The formal review focuses on the efficiency of market transactions,while the substantive review focuses on fair and honest transactions.Under formal sensorship,taking the duration of objection as the sole reason for the termination of the contract will produce many negative effects and it will violate the principle of contract law.Under substantial censorship,to make a judgment based on the actual effect of contract rescission is the way to realize the legal value and fair transaction.In the face of the problems arising from the current trial,it is advisable to eliminate the influence brought by the form of review as soon as possible,so as to ensure the fairness and stability of the economic exchanges between the parties to the contract.Legislatively,the objection to contract rescission should be improved to eliminate the ambiguity of the relevant provisions and the legislative gap also should be filled.Judically,unify judge to the trial way of the case,avoiding possible malicious termination and maintaining the benign development of market trading order by means of substantial censorship.