论文部分内容阅读
在赠与合同中,当赠与物存在瑕疵时,受赠人应当如何适用《合同法》第191条的规定寻求私法救济,学界和实务界对此存在着不同的观点。文章将运用文义解释和体系解释等民法解释方法,对《合同法》第191条的具体适用予以解释。从体系解释的角度看,赠与瑕疵责任的性质应当定性为违约责任,而非瑕疵担保责任。该条“瑕疵”的外延不仅仅指物的瑕疵,还应包含权利瑕疵。该条第1款第1句和该款第1条第2句、第2款之间存在着原则与例外的关系,除非有特殊情形,赠与物存在瑕疵时,赠与人不承担任何责任。当出现第2款中的特殊情形时,赠与人所应承担的损害赔偿责任应仅包括固有利益损失和信赖利益损失,而不应当包含履行利益损失。当赠与物瑕疵导致受赠人固有利益损失时,赠与人的行为构成侵权行为,不发生侵权责任与违约责任的竞合。
In the gift contract, when there are flaws in the gift, how to apply for the remedy of private law according to the provisions of Article 191 of the Contract Law, the recipients should have different views on the issue. The article will explain the specific application of Article 191 of the Contract Law by using civil law interpretation methods such as the textual interpretation and the system explanation. From the perspective of system interpretation, the nature of the liability for gift flaws should be characterized as liability for breach of contract, not flawed warranty liability. The “flaws” extension of the article not only refers to the flaw, it should also include the right flaw. There is a principle and an exception between the first sentence of paragraph 1 of the Article and the second sentence and the second paragraph of Article 1 of this Article. The donor shall not be responsible for any defects in the gift unless there are special circumstances. Where special circumstances in paragraph 2 arise, the liability for damages to be borne by the grantor shall include only the loss of inherent interest and the loss of trust benefit, and shall not include the loss of interest. When the gifts give rise to flaws inherent loss of interest, the donor’s acts constitute infringement, there is no tort liability and breach of contract competing.