Two papers in the same issue of a Heilongjiang publication are now identical to the response of the relevant person in charge

Two papers in the same issue of the Heilongjiang issue are the same. Response: I will understand the situation at that time

　　The Paper Journalist Yu Xi

　　The Paper (www.thepaper.cn) recently received reports from netizens that the author was signed by Heilongjiang Provincial People’s Procuratorate Wang Guodong and Jin Yinqiang, and published in the second issue of Heilongjiang Provincial Political and Law Management Cadre College 2000, the paper "On the New Contract Law" "Several Issues on Contract Liability", and the author signed by Liu Chang, Graduate School of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, published in the same periodical (Journal of Heilongjiang Institute of Political Science and Law, 2000, Issue 2) thesis "On Contract Liability in the New Contract Law" The article "Some Issues" is very similar.

　　A comparison of The Paper News found that netizens reported true.

The above two papers show that Wang Guodong and Jinyinqiang's paper were received on March 29, 2000, and Liu Chang's paper was received on May 18, 2000.

　　Recently, The Paper called the Journal of Heilongjiang Provincial Institute of Political Science and Law Management. A related person in charge said that if two articles in the same periodical are similar, there may be printing errors.

The person in charge said that the time was too long and the persons in charge at that time had been transferred or retired, and would try their best to understand the situation at that time.

The two papers have the same part, and the lower left corner of the two papers is the date of receipt.

　　For example, in the third section of the article "Trial Discussion on Several Issues Concerning Contract Liability in the New Contract Law" written by Wang Guodong and Jinyinqiang, the second paragraph of the "Principle of Imputation of Contract Liability" states that the new contract law has The principle of liability has not yet been clearly determined. Due to differences in knowledge and understanding, there have been major differences in the principles of contract liability in the civil law theory.

Some scholars argue that the new contract law establishes the principle of fault liability; some scholars maintain that the new contract law establishes the principle of no-fault liability, that is, the principle of strict liability, and respectively expounded their views and reasons.

However, from the analysis of the content of contract liability, the author believes that the new contract law adopts the method of seeking truth from facts and dealing separately in establishing the principle of contract liability.

Both the principle of fault liability and the principle of strict liability are adopted.

The two are applicable to different contract areas and stages.

As can be seen from the relevant provisions of the New Contract Law, since it is clearly emphasized that the negligence of the parties is a condition for liability, the principle of fault liability can only be applied to determine and deal with the liability for fault and post-contract liability, and the principle of strict liability cannot be applied. ; In terms of liability for breach of contract, since only the facts of breach of contract are stipulated, and the fault of the parties is not stipulated as the condition for liability, the principle of strict liability should be applied to identify and deal with; and for liability for contract invalidation, due to different stipulations In fact, the different treatment methods under the circumstances also reflect the two principles of liability, that is, the principle of strict liability should be applied when the liability for return is assumed and the liability for discount compensation when the return is not possible, and the principle of strict liability should be applied when the liability for damages is assumed. The principle of fault liability.

The imputation principle of contract liability actually reflects the basic value orientation of national legislation.

Judging from the legislative situation of various countries, civil law countries generally adopt the principle of liability for fault. While adhering to the objectivity of contract liability, it emphasizes subjective fault as the basic standard of attribution, which reflects the negation of fault by law and has morality. On the guide function.

Common law countries generally adopt the principle of strict liability, with special emphasis on the objectivity of contract liability, which reflects the strong protection of the seriousness of the contract by the law, with a strong color of pragmatism.

As mentioned earlier, my country’s new contract law adopts different contract liability principles in different fields and at different stages, taking into account the moral guidance and practical functions of the law, and embodies the legislative spirit of seeking truth from facts.

　　The second paragraph of the "Principles of Contract Liability" in the article "A Discussion on Several Issues Concerning Contract Liability in the New Contract Law" written by Liu Chang states that the new Contract Law does not clearly define the principles of contract liability. .

Some scholars advocate the principle of fault liability; some scholars advocate the principle of no-fault liability, that is, the principle of strict liability, and respectively expounded their views and reasons.

But from the analysis of the content of contract liability, the author believes that the new contract law adopts both the fault liability principle and the strict liability principle in establishing the principle of contract liability.

The two are applicable to different contract areas and stages.

As can be seen from the relevant provisions of the New Contract Law, since it is clearly emphasized that the negligence of the parties is a condition for liability, the principle of liability for fault can only be applied to determine and deal with the liability for fault in contracting and the post-contract liability, and strict liability cannot be applied. Principles; in terms of liability for breach of contract, since only the facts of breach of contract are stipulated, and the fault of the parties is not stipulated as the condition for liability, the principle of strict liability shall be applied to identify and deal with; and for liability for contract invalidation, due to different regulations In fact, the different treatment methods under the circumstance of circumstance also reflect the two principles of attribution, that is, when assuming the responsibility for return and when the return is not possible, the principle of strict liability shall be applied, and when the liability for damages shall be The principle of fault liability applies.

The imputation principle of contract liability actually reflects the basic value orientation of national legislation.

Judging from the legislative situation of various countries, the civil law countries generally adopt the principle of fault liability, while the common law countries generally adopt the principle of strict liability.

my country's new contract law adopts different contract liability principles in different fields and at different stages, taking into account the moral guidance and practical functions of the law, and embodies the legislative spirit of seeking truth from facts.

　　It can be seen from the comparison that the above two paragraphs are completely the same except for the deletion of the article "A Discussion on Some Issues Concerning Contract Liability in the New Contract Law".