Study On The Objection Rule Of Contract Rescission

In the Contract Law,article 96,paragraph one,the third sentence establishes the objection rule for the rescission of contract.If the other side of the trading parties has objection to the rescission of contract,one may request the court or arbitration institution to confirm the effectiveness of the rescission of contract.In the Civil Code,article 565,paragraph one,the second sentence has partially modified the rule,recognized that both side of the trading parties have the right to request the court or arbitration institution to confirm the effectiveness of the rescission of contract,and further clarified that the object of this confirmation is the effectiveness of the action as the rescission of contract rather than the effectiveness of the rescission of contract itself.When the opposite party raises an objection,there is a certain intention of objection and an act of expression.Its characteristics are similar to that of the notification of intension in the quasi-juristic acts,so it should be positioned as the notification of intension.The occurrence,change and extinction of civil rights mostly depend on a specific time.The objection to the rescission of contract is a notification of intension,not a right.Limit the objection period for it will deviate from the time attribute of civil rights.In addition,both parties have the right to request the court or arbitration institution to confirm the effectiveness of the rescission of contract,which can also achieve the aim of clarifying the contractual relationship as soon as possible.Therefore,to limit the legal objection period is no longer necessary.The agreed time limit for objection to the rescission of contract is the result of the private autonomy between the two trading parties and should be recognized.In the Civil Code,article565,paragraph one,the second sentence stipulates that each of the parties may request the people’s court or arbitration institution to confirm the effectiveness of the dissolution.The usage of the word "may" in this provision indicates that the opposite party to the rescission of contract can either file an objection or not,and only express its objection in the form of self-reliance relief such as a reply.The form of public remedy is to ensure the realization of the rights and interests of the parties with the authority of the judicial body,which the objection rule of contract rescission has confirmed.The value of improving efficiency and saving judicial resources of private remedy determines that the parties should be given the right to choose between public remedy and private remedy.The coexistence of the two can urge the parties to make further communication and clarify the contractual relationship as soon as possible.The standard of form examination does not conform to the logic of contract rescission,with no guarantee that the rescinding party does the action of rescinding the contract only when has the right to do it.The substantive examination standard should be adopted at the level of interpretation and unified in the future trial practice because it has the advantages of conforming to the basic logic of contract rescission and preventing the occurrence of rescinding on a whim.