摘要
《民法典合同编通则解释》在承袭《合同法司法解释二》部分价值取向的基础上,规定当事人有权通过反诉或抗辩的方式请求调整违约金以及不得以合同约定为由排除适用违约金调减。人民法院裁判酌减违约金不得单依“过分高于违约造成的损失”这一缘由,应综合考察合同全貌以及“过分高于”一般是以30%为阈值。然而对该司法解释的理解适用仍存有较大探讨空间。违约金调整制度是违约责任中适用较为普遍的重要制度,为更好地理解与适用该制度,需要对相关概念进行辨析,在厘清现有法条设计逻辑的基础上细化规则,为司法实践提供进一步的指导参考。
The Interpretation of the General Principles of Contract Compilation of the Civil Code inherits certain value orientations from the Second Judicial Interpretation of the Contract Law while stipulating that parties may request an adjustment of liquidated damages through counterclaims or defenses,and that contractual agreements cannot be used to exclude the application of liquidated damages reduction.Courts adjudicating the discretionary reduction of liquidated damages must not rely solely on the reason that the damages are“excessively higher than the losses caused by the breach,”but should comprehensively examine the entirety of the contract,with“excessively higher”generally being defined by a threshold of 30%.However,there remains significant room for discussion regarding the interpretation and application of this judicial interpretation.The liquidated damages adjustment system is a crucial and widely applied mechanism in breach of contract liability.To better understand and apply this system,it is necessary to clarify relevant concepts,refine the existing legal framework,and provide further guidance for judicial practice.
出处
《河北法律职业教育》
2025年第4期112-117,共6页
HEBEI VOCATIONAL EDUCATION OF LAW
关键词
违约金
定金
违约金调减权
司法酌减
liquidated damages
deposit
right to reduce liquidated damages
judicial discretion
