| Contract deadlock is a new problem and a new situation appearing in the judicial practice in recent years.Practice,the concrete form of contract deadlock complex diversity,no matter what form of contract deadlock,if blindly follow the principle of contract,harmful to the parties,and break the deadlock of the contract both parties from the contract constraint,to improve the market transaction efficiency and resource utilization is of great significance.In the practical field,as China has been in a legislative blank state in the field of contract deadlock for a long time,most judicial organs refer to the judgment ideas of the communique of the Supreme People’s Court in 2006 to try the case of the termination right of the breaching party.Although the local courts at all levels have contradictions in the judgment of contract impasse cases,they have also accumulated a lot of practical experience for the introduction of the cancellation right system of the breaching party in the Civil Code.In the academic circle,restricted by the principle of strict adherence to the contract and the prohibition of illegal profit in the traditional civil law theory,the breaching party has no right to terminate the contract theoretically.However,with the absorption and development of the efficiency default theory and the limited rationality theory in the economic principle in the civil law circle,the substantive legitimacy of the breaching party’s dissolution right can be proved from the three aspects of interest,structure and reality,which lays a theoretical foundation for the introduction of the system of the breaching party’s termination right in the Civil Code.In terms of legislation,the Civil Code adds paragraph 2 of Article 580 on the basis of inheriting the original Article 110 of the Contract Law to fulfill the defense rules,which fills the legislative gap in the field of cracking contract deadlock in China.Although the introduction of Article 580 of the Civil Code provides a guide to break the contract deadlock,there are still disputes on understanding and application in judicial practice due to the restriction of legislative technology and conservative legislative attitude.Through empirical research,we found that: firstly,the local court of article 580;secondly,there are different treatment methods in judicial practice to solve the deadlock of money debt contract;finally,the judgment of the scope of damages after the termination of the contract.Therefore,the necessary judicial interpretation should be issued as soon as possible to provide normative explanations on the problems in the judicial application of the dissolution right system of the breaching party in the Civil Code. |
