摘要
合同解除异议权最先出现在《合同法》第九十六条中,后最高院为了完善异议权的适用,在《合同法》解释(二)之中对于其适用条件、法律后果进行了一个更为全面的阐述。但由于实体权利与程序权利两者的冲突,致使异议期满后是否需要就合同解除条件进行实质审查产生了争议,进而形成了实质理解和形式理解两种截然不同的解释方案。因此比较论证两种解释方法何者更具合理性,对现有规定进行一个适度修正就显得至关重要。
The right to terminate the contract firstly appeared in the ＂Contract Law＇ninety-sixth. Supreme Court made a more comprehensive exposition in the ＂Contract Law＂interpretation （two） in terms of its applicable conditions, the legal consequences. After the expiration of the objection, it is controversial about the substantive examination of the conditions for the termination of the contract Because of the conflicts between the substantive rights and procedural rights. It forms two distinct interpretations between real understanding and understanding of the form. It is vital that comparing two kinds of interpretation method which is more reasonable and making a moderate amendment to the existing provisions.
出处
《广西政法管理干部学院学报》
2017年第2期81-85,共5页
Journal of Guangxi Administrative Cadre Institute of Politics and Law
关键词
合同解除异议权
形式理解
实质审查
制度完善
the right of objection to the dissolution of the contract
the form of understanding
substantive examination
the perfection of the system
