中国国土资源经济
中國國土資源經濟
중국국토자원경제
Natural Resource Economics of China
2015年
9期
4-10
,共7页
批准生效%成立未生效%预约合同%缔约责任违约化
批準生效%成立未生效%預約閤同%締約責任違約化
비준생효%성립미생효%예약합동%체약책임위약화
approval to take effect%a contract has not been taken effect after its formation%reservation contract%a contract has not been taken
针对“合同成立但未生效”引起纠纷的解决，主要有两种法律解决路径即“缔约责任违约化”与“预约合同”制度。文章客观地介绍了相关制度的内涵、背景、功能及其适用规则，释明现有法律制度的缺陷，理顺我国法律体系因此产生的争议，进而寻求司法实务中疑难案件的解决路径。鉴于“缔约合同违约化”处理方案在法理层面的突出问题以及与现行法律体系的明显冲突，应予以排除，转而选择优势明显的“预约合同”制度。将预约合同制度应用于矿业权的转让过程中，如果法律释明预约合同效力采“必须缔约说”，那么涉矿转让合同可视为预约合同，而“依法批准后的”合同内容视为“本合同”，则实践中因矿业权的流转产生的纠纷也就不再是难题。
針對“閤同成立但未生效”引起糾紛的解決，主要有兩種法律解決路徑即“締約責任違約化”與“預約閤同”製度。文章客觀地介紹瞭相關製度的內涵、揹景、功能及其適用規則，釋明現有法律製度的缺陷，理順我國法律體繫因此產生的爭議，進而尋求司法實務中疑難案件的解決路徑。鑒于“締約閤同違約化”處理方案在法理層麵的突齣問題以及與現行法律體繫的明顯遲突，應予以排除，轉而選擇優勢明顯的“預約閤同”製度。將預約閤同製度應用于礦業權的轉讓過程中，如果法律釋明預約閤同效力採“必鬚締約說”，那麽涉礦轉讓閤同可視為預約閤同，而“依法批準後的”閤同內容視為“本閤同”，則實踐中因礦業權的流轉產生的糾紛也就不再是難題。
침대“합동성립단미생효”인기규분적해결，주요유량충법률해결로경즉“체약책임위약화”여“예약합동”제도。문장객관지개소료상관제도적내함、배경、공능급기괄용규칙，석명현유법률제도적결함，리순아국법률체계인차산생적쟁의，진이심구사법실무중의난안건적해결로경。감우“체약합동위약화”처리방안재법리층면적돌출문제이급여현행법률체계적명현충돌，응여이배제，전이선택우세명현적“예약합동”제도。장예약합동제도응용우광업권적전양과정중，여과법률석명예약합동효력채“필수체약설”，나요섭광전양합동가시위예약합동，이“의법비준후적”합동내용시위“본합동”，칙실천중인광업권적류전산생적규분야취불재시난제。
The systems of“breach of contracting liability”and“pre-contract”are the two major legal resolutions to the dispute arising from“a contract has not been taken effect after its formation”. This paper objectively introduces the connotation, background, function, and applicable rules with regard to relevant legal system. On this basis, it is also interpreted existing deifciency of the legal system and in an effort to straighten out the dispute over the poor legal system with the purposes of seeking the solutions to dififcult cases in judicial practice. In light of the legal serious problems that we face in handling“Breach of Signing Contract”, as well as the obvious conlfict with the current legal system;we should remove it, and turn over to choose the superiority obvious of“Pre-contract System”. This paper suggests that the“Pre-contract System”should be used in the process of the transfer of mining right. Speciifcally, it means that if“must sign”is used for legal interpretation of pre-contract effectiveness, the transfer contract concerning the mineral is deemed as pre-contract. And the contract contents after approval in accordance with the law is deemed as “this contract”. By doing this, in practice, the dispute arising from exchange of mining rights is no longer a problem.
