租赁标的瑕疵与合同救济

租赁标的使用存在公法限制,构成瑕疵;其救济路径除依瑕疵担保主张违约责任之外,尚有依意思表示存在瑕疵(重大误解或者欺诈)主张撤销合同的可能;两种救济路径可由当事人选择。由于权利瑕疵与物的瑕疵在我国法中的构成要件及法律后果均有差异,故对于两类瑕疵进行区分,仍有实际需要。中国合同法在统合瑕疵担保与违约责任的道路上,仍有必要百尺竿头、更进一步。权利瑕疵与物的瑕疵在此处的区分,并无"标准答案";我国实务以标的物受公法限制为一种物的瑕疵,值得赞同。检验通知义务属于不真正义务,检验期间属于除斥期间。瑕疵担保义务属于主给付义务的内容,在其违反具有重大性而使合同目的无法实现场合,可以发生解除权。减价责任的适用通常因当事人行使减价权而引出,惟亦不妨裁判者不经当事人主张而适用减价责任。减价责任虽系物的瑕疵场合的法律后果,在权利瑕疵场合,亦有类推适用的余地。

Defects of Leased Object and the Contractual Remedy

The use of leased object has been restricted by public law,which constitutes the defect in leased object.Besides the remedy for breach of the contract,another possible remedy is to request the court or arbitral tribunal to modify or revoke the contract,either on significant misconception or on fraud.Both remedies are optional for the contractual parties.Under the Chinese law,both the constitutive requirements and legal consequence of the defect in title and the defect in object are different,so it is necess...