替代交易与继续履行请求权

实施替代交易的减损义务与继续履行请求权无法兼容。减损义务的正当性在于债权人负有帮助他人的道德义务,以及避免整体社会财富的浪费。维护债务人的个人自主性,肯定其改变心意的价值,以及违约救济应当遵循比例原则,也可以为排除继续履行请求权提供正当性。肯定债权人的继续履行请求权,从而其不负实施替代交易的减损义务,将导致债权人实施投机行为、间接损失扩大、强加给债务人以不被需要的给付、赋予债权人过重的谈判筹码等不合理的结果。否定继续履行请求权并不会产生鼓励违约、无法提供充分救济、规则模糊等问题。因此,当债权人能够实施替代交易时,损害赔偿就可以为其提供充分救济,债权人无继续履行请求权,提存规则应当相应作限缩解释。

Substitute Transaction and the Right to Specific Performance

The“duty”to mitigation of implementing substitute transaction is not compatible with the right to specific performance.The legitimacy of the mitigation rule lies in the moral obligation of the creditor to help others and the avoidance of the waste of the whole social wealth.Protecting the debtor's individual autonomy,affirming the value of changing his mind,and that the remedy for breach of contract should follow the principle of proportionality,can also provide legitimacy for excluding the right to specific performance.If the creditor can claim specific performance,and so as not to have the“duty”to implement substitute transaction,it will lead to unreasonable results,i.e.the creditor's speculative behavior,the expansion of consequential damages,the imposition of unnecessary performance on the debtor,and the bestowal of excessive bargaining power.The denial of the right to specific performance will not lead to the problems of encouraging breach of contract,failing to provide adequate relief and fuzzy rules.Therefore,when the creditor can make a substitute transaction,damages can provide sufficient relief for him,and he has no right of specific performance.The deposit rules should be limited accordingly.