违约精神损害赔偿的理论障碍及其克服

精神损害赔偿问题在理论上至今仍然被认为是侵权行为法上的专门问题,与合同法中的违约责任问题关系不大。尽管我国合同法确立了责任竞合的有关规则,然而该规则并非万能,它无法解决仅仅因为违约但不侵权导致的精神损害后果的赔偿问题。对违约精神损害赔偿问题持反对意见者所提出的种种理由虽然值得重视,但均不足以成为立法政策上拒绝规定违约精神损害赔偿制度的真正法理依据。现实生活与司法实践迫切期待打破违约责任中不存在精神损害赔偿问题的理论神话,在严格限制其适用范围与构成要件的基础上,我们应当建立违约精神损害赔偿制度。

Theory Barriers and its Surmounting Measures on Emotional Distress Damages in Breach of Contract

It has been generally accepted that the issues of emotional distress damages exclusively belong to torts law theory and have less relations with the liability for breach of contract in contract theory.Although relevant regulations on liability concurrence have been established in the contract law,the damages arisen from breach of contract other than torts can not yet be duly solved thereby.It is worthwhile to notice various arguments against the emotional distress damages in breach of contract;nevertheless,such opposing arguments are far from justifiable to act as the jurisprudential basis to deny the system of emotional distress damages in breach of contract in the legislative perspective.Actual situations and judicial practice urges to free us from the theoretical shackles that there is no emotional distress damages in breach of contract.Therefore,it is suggested that the system of emotional distress damages be established on the basis of strictly restricted applicable scope and requirements constitution.