Empirical Analysis Of Loss Of Benefits Obtained By Default

With economic development,legal concepts are constantly being updated.In the case of breach of contract damages,compensation for direct losses alone cannot adapt to China's current economic situation,and the system of compensation for loss of gains is becoming increasingly important.The basic framework of the benefits available in China today consists of Article 113 of the Contract Law of the People's Republic of China(hereinafter referred to as the "Contract Law")and the "Guide Opinions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues in the Trial of Civil and Commercial Contract Disputes under the Current Situation"(Articles 9 to 11 of the "Guiding Opinions",Articles 30 and 31 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of Legal Issues in the Trial of Disputes over Sales Contracts(hereinafter referred to as the "Interpretation of Sales Contracts")Article composition.Because the relevant determination rules are too vague,and some rules and standards are lacking,it is difficult for judges to determine the loss of gains in judicial practice.In many cases,judges can only rely on their own knowledge and experience to exercise discretion.Therefore,compensation claims for available benefits are often difficult to obtain support,and often there are different cases in the same case.This article attempts to find out the current system of the recognition of the loss of available benefits in China by statistically sorting out the relevant cases of the damage of the available benefits.At the same time,by drawing on the advanced ideas of the academic world and the creative and excellent judgments in practice,we hope to put forward some feasible suggestions,hoping to make a small contribution to the improvement of the loss of available benefits system in China's contract law.The author divides the full text into four parts:The first part is the definition of available benefits.The available benefits are relatively certain.Based on the actual situation,the parties to the contract believe that a value-added benefit can be obtained as long as the contract performs itself.And the benefits available are futuristic,relatively certain,and predictable.Finally,the content and extension of available benefits are further defined by comparing availablebenefits with trusted benefits and expected benefits.In the second part,the author collects and sorts out a large number of cases about the available benefits over the years,and analyzes the data statistics and analysis.It statistics the judgment basis,compensation conditions and burden of proof of whether the judges found the available benefits in judicial practice.It is concluded that there are obviously fewer cases in China to support the compensation of available benefits,and most judges are conservative and cautious.Then,by analyzing representative cases,the reasons for the difficulty in obtaining available benefits in judicial practice are explored,and the problems existing in the system of available interests in China are drawn.First,the vast majority of judges in China determine They are all rules of determination that are not expressly stipulated in the applicable laws.As China does not have relevant specific regulations such as certification standards and calculation methods,the requirements of judges for certainty of available benefits are generally too high.Second,the foreseeable rules are too vague and incomplete to make it difficult to correctly grasp the subject,scope,and judgment criteria foreseen.Third,the compliance party is burdened with burden of proof.Fourth,the inaccurate positioning of available benefits and imperfect liquidation provisions make it easy to confuse the two.The third part puts forward perfect suggestions for the problems summarized: to establish China's determination rules,including establishing relative determination standards,distinguishing facts and amounts,and proposing specific calculation methods and standards.Improve foreseeable rules,including excluding malicious breach of contract,clarifying foreseeable content,drawing on the foresight standards of common rational persons in the common law system,and distinguishing between foreseeable situations.Reasonably allocate the burden of proof by transferring some of the burden of proof.The problem of easy confusion is solved by distinguishing the nature of liquidated damages and clarifying the relationship between liquidated damages and available benefits.