The imputation principle of liability for breach of contract

The principle of liability for breach of contract can be simply divided into two categories.

The first is the principle of fault liability, which is divided into the principle of presumption of fault and the principle of general fault.

The second is the principle of no-fault liability, which means that even if there is no fault, you have to bear the responsibility. Theoretically, academic circles also divide it into absolute no-fault principle and relative no-fault principle.

The imputation principle of the liability for breach of contract, and what are the exemptions of the liability for breach of contract?

China's Contract Law stipulates the principle of strict liability. Article 107 of the Contract Law stipulates: "If a party fails to perform its contractual obligations or fails to perform its contractual obligations, it shall be liable for breach of contract such as continuing to perform, taking remedial measures or compensating for losses." What is defined here is the principle of strict liability.

The so-called strict liability, also known as no-fault liability, refers to the determination of the liability of the defaulting party after breach of contract, and whether the breach result is caused by the behavior of the defaulting party should be mainly considered, regardless of the intention or negligence of the defaulting party. The main reasons for determining strict liability in contract law are as follows: first, the establishment of strict liability did not begin in contract law, and there are also provisions on strict liability in general principles of civil law, foreign-related economic contract law and technology contract law. Second, strict liability is conducive to the referee and enhances the sense of contractual responsibility. Third, the principle of strict liability conforms to the essence of liability for breach of contract. Because the liability for breach of contract is essentially transformed from contractual obligations and is an agreement between the parties. When one party fails to perform the contract, it is to investigate its liability for breach of contract and to implement the will and agreement of the parties, so the principle of strict liability should be implemented. Fourth, the establishment of strict liability is helpful to better integrate with the rules of international economic and trade exchanges. For example, the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods and the General Principles of International Commercial Contracts establish the principle of strict liability.

However, when the law has special provisions, the principle of fault liability can also be applied. China's contract law stipulates the principle of fault liability in some subcontracts. For example, Article 180 of the Contract Law stipulates that a power supplier shall be liable for damages if it fails to supply power safely according to the statutory and agreed power supply quality standards; Article 222 stipulates that if the lessee causes damage or loss of the lease item due to improper storage, it shall bear the liability for fault such as damages and the liability for breach of contract.

Generally speaking, exemption can be divided into statutory exemption and agreed exemption.

Statutory exemption is directly stipulated by law and can be invoked without the consent of the parties, including general statutory exemption and special statutory exemption. The former refers to force majeure with universal applicability, that is, an objective situation that cannot be foreseen, avoided and overcome; The latter refers to other exemptions provided by law. With regard to special statutory exemptions, the main provisions of China's Contract Law are as follows: Article 3 1 1 stipulates that "if the goods are damaged or lost during transportation, the carrier shall be liable for damages, but the carrier shall not be liable for damages if it proves that the damage or loss of the goods is caused by force majeure, the natural nature or reasonable loss of the goods itself and the fault of the shipper or consignee"; Paragraph 2 of Article 394 stipulates that "if the goods deteriorate or are damaged due to the nature and packaging of the goods that are not in conformity with the agreement or the expiration of the effective storage period, the safekeeping party shall not be liable for damages"; Article 1 19 stipulates that "after one party breaches the contract, the other party shall take appropriate measures to prevent the loss from expanding; If appropriate measures are not taken to cause the loss to expand, no compensation shall be claimed for the expanded loss. " The agreed exemption reason refers to the situation that the parties agree to be exempted from liability in the contract, which is called exemption clause. In principle, when there is no invalid reason for the agreement between the two parties, its validity should be recognized. However, the exemption clause shall not violate the mandatory provisions of the law and the public interest, otherwise it will be invalid. Article 53 of China's Contract Law stipulates that the exemption clause for personal injury or property loss caused by intentional or gross negligence is invalid. Article 40 stipulates that an exemption clause that exempts the party providing the format clause from responsibility, aggravates the other party's responsibility and excludes the other party's rights is invalid.

Is the principle of liability for breach of contract very important? 1. The principle of imputation directly determines the constitutive requirements of liability for breach of contract. Adopting the imputation principle of fault liability means that fault is a general element of liability for breach of contract. The principle of strict liability is adopted, which shows that its liability composition is not based on fault, and whether the breaching party is at fault does not affect its liability for breach of contract.

2. The principle of imputation determines who bears the burden of proof. Under the imputation principle of fault liability, the non-breaching party only bears the burden of proof for the fact that the breaching party fails to perform its obligations or the performance of its obligations does not conform to the agreement. At the same time, the method of fault presumption is adopted, and the breaching party is required to bear the burden of proof to prove that he is subjectively innocent. Under the principle of strict liability, the breaching party is generally not required to bear the above burden of proof, that is, the subjective fault of the breaching party is generally not considered.

3. The principle of imputation determines the reasons for exemption. In the application of the principle of fault liability, force majeure is the main reason for exemption, but the debtor can also be exempted from liability because of an accident without personal fault. In the application of the principle of strict liability, the statutory exemption is mainly force majeure.

4. The principle of imputation also has a certain influence on the size of the liability for breach of contract. Because the principle of fault liability should take fault as the general element of liability for breach of contract, the liability for loss after breach of contract must also refer to the size of the fault of both parties. When the principle of strict liability is adopted, the fault degree of both parties is generally not considered.

What are the general principles of liability for breach of contract? 1, according to the current relevant laws and regulations, imputation is the determination of the attribution of legal responsibility and the basis and standard for determining the actor's responsibility. When determining the responsibility, we must follow certain imputation principles in order to correctly identify the responsibility.

2. In the system of liability for breach of contract, the general imputation principle is based on the subjective fault of the parties, the consequences of breach of contract or other standards, which is the purpose of the imputation principle of liability for breach of contract.

What's the difference between liability for breach of contract and contractual liability? The liability for breach of contract is the responsibility that must be borne for breach of contract, provided that the contract has been established and has not been fulfilled.

The imputation of contracting responsibility is based on the responsibility of violating the previous contractual obligations, thus causing losses to the other party. The contract is not established, but both parties have the intention to conclude a contract, which means that this responsibility is also based on the principle of good faith. The party at fault shall make corresponding compensation to the other party (relying on interests, but not exceeding the interests that can be obtained when the contract is performed normally).

If the injured party is at fault at the same time, the losses caused by the fault shall be borne by the injured party!

The rules and principles of liability for breach of contract, that is, the determination of legal liability, are the basis and standards for determining the liability of the actor. When determining the responsibility, we must follow certain imputation principles in order to correctly identify the responsibility. In the system of liability for breach of contract, the law takes the subjective fault of the parties, the consequences of breach of contract or others as the judgment standard, which is the original intention of the principle of liability for breach of contract.

Comparison of two principles of liability for breach of contract

1. Principle of fault liability. The principle of fault liability refers to that when one party fails to perform the contractual obligations or the performance of the contractual obligations is inconsistent with the contract, the fault should be taken as the basis for determining the constitutive elements and scope of liability. This principle regards fault as a constituent element of liability for breach of contract, which embodies a strong moral value orientation, that is, there is responsibility if there is fault, and there is no responsibility if there is no fault. This is conducive to the implementation of the socialist moral norms of honesty and trustworthiness, keeping promises and respecting the labor and property of others, and is conducive to the construction of socialist spiritual civilization. According to this principle, as long as the parties to the contract pay attention to it, even if the contract cannot be performed or fully performed due to force majeure or accidents, they can not bear the responsibility according to law. At the same time, every subject should be responsible for his own wrong behavior, which is also conducive to strengthening people's awareness of being responsible for their own actions. Therefore, it is conducive to the correct implementation of trading behavior and encourages legal trading and competition. In addition, the application of the principle of fault liability can punish the parties who are at fault and play an educational and warning role.

Although the principle of fault liability has the above advantages, its disadvantages are also obvious, that is, the parties can get more exemption opportunities when they breach the contract. However, when signing a contract, it is difficult for the parties to predict the situation that may lead to the inability to perform the contract in the future. When these situations are not attributable to the breaching party, it is difficult to guarantee the performance of the contract. And sometimes it is difficult to judge whether the parties are at fault, which may make the parties who are at fault get the determination of no fault, thus avoiding the liability for breach of contract and indulging the breach of contract.

2. The principle of strict liability. The principle of strict liability means that no matter whether the breaching party is subjectively at fault or not, as long as it fails to perform its contractual obligations or fails to perform its contractual obligations, it must bear the liability for breach of contract. The principle of strict liability is a kind of imputation principle with the actual damage result as an important element. It does not pay attention to the punishment of faults, but to the compensation of creditors' losses. In this way, even if the other party is not at fault (he has not breached the contract), he can get reasonable compensation, thus avoiding the disadvantages brought by applying the principle of fault liability. Compared with fault liability, the principle of strict liability eliminates the difficulty of proving whether the parties are at fault, which is beneficial to litigation and arbitration. Secondly, the parties' breach of contract, that is, the failure or improper performance of the contract, is directly related to the liability for breach of contract, which is mutually causal and conducive to enhancing the parties' sense of responsibility and law. Third, the principle of strict liability is more in line with the essence of liability for breach of contract. In a sense, the obligations agreed by both parties in the contract are the laws made by both parties for themselves. If a party violates its contractual obligations and cannot be excused, it shall bear the liability for breach of contract. Fourthly, the principle of strict liability is the development trend of contract legal system in modern law. For example, the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods and many other important international contract conventions also adopt the principle of strict liability.

However, the principle of strict liability lacks flexibility in legislation and traditional fairness in civil and commercial law.

On the imputation principle of violating labor law. Principles of fault liability and no-fault liability; Principles of intentional liability and negligence liability.

Principle of negligence and principle of liability without fault; Intentional liability principle and unintentional liability principle.

Refers to the civil liability of one party in the labor legal relationship who violates the provisions of the labor law or the agreement between the two parties.

(1) Civil liability for breach of labor contract

Civil liability for breach of a labor contract refers to the legal consequences caused by one or both parties' breach of obligations stipulated in the contract.

1. The employer terminates the labor contract in violation of the provisions of this Law. Article 98 of the Labor Law stipulates: "If an employer terminates a labor contract in violation of the conditions stipulated in this Law or deliberately delays the conclusion of a labor contract, the labor administrative department shall order it to make corrections; If it causes damage to workers, it shall be liable for compensation. "

2. The laborer terminates the labor contract in violation of the conditions stipulated in this Law. Article 102 of the Labor Law stipulates: "If a laborer dissolves the labor contract in violation of the conditions stipulated in this law or violates the confidentiality matters stipulated in the labor contract, thus causing economic losses to the employer, he shall be liable for compensation according to law."

3. The invalid contract concluded due to the reason of the employer causes damage to the workers. (Article 97 of the Labor Law stipulates: "If an invalid contract is concluded because of the employer, it shall be liable for compensation." Because of the employer, it generally refers to the employer's expression of will, which leads to the invalidity of the labor contract. Because the employer deliberately signed an invalid labor contract, causing losses to the workers, of course, it should compensate for the losses.

(2) Civil liability for infringement

(Tort civil liability in the Labor Law refers to the civil legal liability that an employer should bear if it infringes upon the legitimate rights and interests of laborers or other employers protected by labor laws and regulations. There are two kinds of torts in the labor legal relationship stipulated in the Labor Law.

1, the tort liability of employers to workers.

(1) The civil liability that the employer should bear if it infringes upon the legitimate rights and interests of workers. According to the Labor Law, workers have the right to be paid according to their work and rest and vacation. In addition, the law also provides special protection for women and underage workers. These rights are the legitimate rights and interests given to workers by law, and they are also the basic rights of workers under socialist conditions. No unit or individual may infringe upon human rights.

(2) The employer's civil liability for the damage caused by the employee's performance of duties. If a laborer suffers damage due to the performance of his duties, the employing unit shall bear civil liability for compensation. Because the laborer completes a certain job for the employer, the employer should provide the laborer with working conditions suitable for service, implement labor protection for the laborer, and ensure that the laborer is not injured accidentally when completing the job. Labor relations are based on labor contracts, but workers' right to enjoy labor protection should not and cannot be deprived. This kind of liability for compensation shall not be exempted by both parties in advance. Even if it is clearly stipulated in the labor contract that "the employer will not bear the responsibility for the casualties of workers in the labor", this clause is illegal and therefore invalid. Then, is the civil liability of the employer for the damage caused by the performance of duties a fault liability or a no-fault liability? In order to find out the imputation principle that employers should be responsible for, we must first find out what is fault liability and what is no-fault liability. Fault liability is a civil liability based on the fault of the actor. In other words, civil liability can only be assumed if the doer intentionally or negligently causes damage to the laborer. If the actor is not intentional or negligent, he will not bear civil liability. No-fault liability corresponds to fault liability. No-fault liability is also called consequential liability, that is, as long as there is damage, it should bear civil liability. In the labor legal relationship, as long as the workers suffer losses at work, they should bear civil liability regardless of whether the employer is subjectively at fault or not. No-fault liability should be applied to the tort liability of employers. That is, as long as the employer infringes upon the rights of workers and causes damage to them, it should be liable for compensation. Unless the employer can prove that the damage was intentionally caused by the laborer himself. This is because in the labor legal relationship, the damage suffered by workers occurs in the process of labor, and it is often difficult for workers to prove that their damage is caused by poor management of employers or other reasons. If employees are required to prove that their employers are at fault, it will be difficult for them to get compensation. In addition, our socialist labor law protects the interests of workers, and also protects their legitimate rights and interests from the infringement of workers' interests. Therefore, when dealing with the tort civil liability of the employer, unless the employer can prove that the damage suffered by the laborer is caused by his own behavior, he should give the laborer appropriate compensation.

2. The civil liability of the employer for violating the rights of other employers by establishing a new labor contract relationship. Article 99 of the Labor Law stipulates: "If an employer recruits workers whose labor contracts have not been terminated, causing economic losses to the original employer, the employer shall be jointly and severally liable for compensation according to law." The so-called joint liability means that any one of several debtors has the obligation to repay all debts to the creditor. In labor relations, the employer employs workers who have not yet terminated their labor contracts, causing economic losses to the original employer, which constitutes infringement. The original employer is a creditor, and the new employer and employee are joint debtors. In this case, the original employer may require the new employer or laborer to compensate for all the losses.

On the imputation principle of contract liability: the liability for breach of contract, also known as civil liability for breach of contract, refers to the civil liability that the parties to the contract should bear, such as taking remedial measures, compensating losses and paying liquidated damages. Failure to perform contractual obligations or performance of contractual obligations is not in conformity with the agreement. The system of liability for breach of contract occupies a very important position in contract law. The existence of the liability system for breach of contract is the premise that the will of the parties to the contract can be legally binding. It is precisely because of the mandatory liability for breach of contract as a guarantee that the agreement of the parties can bind themselves like a "legal lock". This paper intends to briefly analyze and discuss the principle of liability for breach of contract in China's contract law.

I. Overview of the principle of liability for breach of contract

The imputation in the liability for breach of contract refers to the basis on which the parties to the contract should bear the responsibility after the contractual debts are not performed or improperly performed. This foundation embodies the value judgment of law. For example, in view of the behavior that has occurred, the law takes the fault of the parties or the consequences of the breach of contract that have occurred as the judgment standard, and clearly determines the responsibility that the breaching party should bear. This process of defining responsibility, that is, judging responsibility, is the imputation process of liability for breach of contract. In the process of imputation, we must follow certain legal principles and correctly identify the responsibility, which is the imputation principle of liability for breach of contract. Therefore, the so-called imputation principle is the legal principle to determine the civil liability of the breaching party. (2) The principles of liability for breach of contract in legislation of various countries mainly include the principles of fault liability and strict liability.

The principle of fault liability in contract law refers to that when the parties to a contract violate the obligations stipulated in the contract and fail to perform or perform the contract incorrectly, the subjective fault of the parties is taken as the basis for determining the elements and scope of liability. The principle of fault liability originated from Roman law. In 287 BC, the Roman plebeian conference passed a bill submitted by tribune Aquili Uss, namely the Aquili Law. The content of fault liability is clearly defined in this code, and the principles of "no one is responsible for accidents" and "no fault without punishment" are determined. Since then, Roman law has formed a relatively systematic and complete subjective imputation system on the basis of the provisions of Aquilia Law, through the academic interpretation of jurists and the precedents of magistrates. (3) Civil law countries adopt the principle of fault liability as the principle of liability for breach of contract. For example, the German Civil Code 1900 stipulates that "unless otherwise specified, the debtor shall be responsible for his intentional or negligent behavior".

The principle of strict liability in contract law means that after a contract is breached, whether the parties are at fault or not, the responsibility of the breaching party should be determined, that is, whether the parties are subjectively at fault is not considered, but only whether the consequences of the breach are caused by the actions of the parties. Its characteristic is that it does not consider the subjective state of the breaching party, as long as there is a causal relationship between the breaching behavior and the consequences of the breach, the liability for breach of contract will be established. Common law countries mostly adopt the principle of strict liability. For example, Paragraph (2) of Article 260 of Restatement of American Contract Law (Second Edition) stipulates that "if the performance obligation of the contract has expired, any non-performance will constitute a breach of contract".

In practice, the determination of different imputation principles plays a decisive role in the content of the liability system for breach of contract, which is embodied in the following aspects:

First, the principle of liability for breach of contract directly determines the constitutive requirements of liability for breach of contract. According to the principle of fault liability, the subjective fault of the parties is the general component of the liability for breach of contract; The principle of strict liability is generally not based on the subjective fault of the parties, although in some cases fault is not a factor that can never be considered in the imputation of liability for breach of contract.

Second, the principle of liability for breach of contract determines the burden and content of the burden of proof. Under normal circumstances, in the contracts of countries and regions that adopt the principle of fault liability, the fault of the breaching party is the responsibility element, that is, the so-called fault is the responsibility, and no fault is no responsibility. However, in litigation, in order to protect the interests of the non-defaulting party and reduce the burden of fault proof, the way of fault presumption is generally adopted, that is, the non-defaulting party is not required to prove that the defaulting party is at fault, but after the facts of default are ascertained, the defaulting party is presumed to be at fault and let it bear the liability for breach of contract. At the same time, the breaching party is allowed to prove that he is not at fault, and if the breaching party can prove that he is not at fault, he can get exemption. In the contract law of countries and regions that adopt the principle of strict liability, because fault is not a constituent element of liability, the breaching party does not need to prove that he is not at fault.

As mentioned above, it is generally believed that civil law countries and common law countries adopt fault liability principle and strict liability principle respectively as the principle of liability for breach of contract, but in practice, these two principles are not mutually exclusive in various countries and regions. With the increasingly close economic exchanges and the diversification of trade relations in various countries and regions in the world, the causes and consequences of breach of contract are becoming more and more complicated, and the principle of liability for breach of contract is developing from simplification to diversification, so as to better reflect the value goal of legal fairness and justice, protect the legitimate rights and interests of the parties to the contract and maintain the social and economic order.

Second, the relevant provisions of the principle of liability for breach of contract in China's contract law

According to Article 107 of the Contract Law, that is, "if a party fails to perform its contractual obligations or performs contractual obligations in conformity with the agreement, it shall bear the liabilities for breach of contract, such as continuing to perform, taking remedial measures or compensating for losses", the principle of strict liability is applied to the liability for breach of contract in China, and the establishment of this principle has a certain development process.

As we all know, the principle of liability for breach of contract in the earliest economic contract law adopts the principle of fault liability, that is, "if the economic contract cannot be performed or cannot be fully performed due to the fault of one party, the party at fault shall bear the liability for breach of contract". Later, the General Principles of Civil Law, Foreign-related Economic Contract Law and Technology Contract Law were formulated, and the principle of liability for breach of contract adopted the principle of strict liability. For example, Article11of the General Principles of Civil Law stipulates: "If one party fails to perform its contractual obligations or fails to meet the agreed conditions, the other party has the right to demand performance or take remedial measures. In view of this, the new "Contract Law" clearly stipulates that the liability for breach of contract is based on the principle of strict liability, so as to unify the different understandings and practices of legislation and practice for the following reasons:

First, the principle of strict liability is applied, and the composition of liability for breach of contract is only that the parties fail to perform or improperly perform the obligations stipulated in the contract. The possibility of exemption for the breaching party lies in proving the existence of exemption reasons. Therefore, in litigation, the non-breaching party only needs to prove the fact that the breaching party has not fulfilled its contractual obligations. If there is no evidence to prove the existence of exemption, the breaching party shall bear the liability for breach of contract according to law. Because non-performance and exemption are objective facts, it is relatively easy to prove and judge their existence, so it is convenient for judgment and litigation.

Second, under the principle of strict liability, if there is a breach of contract, there will be a liability for breach of contract, which is conducive to urging the parties to take the contract seriously, maintaining the seriousness of the contract, preventing the breaching party from seeking no fault under the principle of fault liability to avoid responsibility, and enhancing the responsibility of the parties.

Third, the principle of strict liability is more in line with the essence of liability for breach of contract. There is a significant difference between the occurrence of tort and the occurrence of breach of contract. Tort liability generally occurs between parties who have no direct contact. In law, it is not only the premise of damage that requires the infringer to bear the responsibility, but also other reasons besides the fact of damage, that is, imputation. Fault is the imputation principle of tort liability. Only when the damage caused is investigated according to the principle of fault liability, people's behavior will not be unduly restricted, which will be beneficial to the development of society. Different from tort liability, the liability for breach of contract is transformed from contractual obligations, which is essentially agreed by both parties, which in itself makes the liability for breach of contract fully reasonable and convincing. Therefore, the contractual liability should be strict. ④

Fourth, it conforms to the international development trend of contract law. Common law countries have always regarded strict liability as the principle of liability for breach of contract, and some countries in civil law system, such as Germany, have also developed from fault liability to strict liability principle. The United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods also adopts the principle of strict liability for breach of contract. As a participating country, the Convention has entered into force for China. The Principles of International Commercial Contracts and the Principles of European Contract Law, which were published in recent years and drafted by jurists from common law countries and civil law countries, also adopted the principle of strict liability. Therefore, China's "Contract Law" adopts the principle of strict liability, which not only conforms to the international conventions to which China is a party, but also meets the requirements of international contract legislation.

It should be noted that the principle of liability for breach of contract in contract law applies strict liability in principle, but the principle of fault liability is stipulated in some special cases of contract law, such as articles 189, 19 1, 222, 265 and 303. The above exceptions have not changed the dominant position of strict liability principle in China's contract law.

To sum up, the principle of liability for breach of contract in China's contract law has formed a diversified scientific liability system based on strict liability principle and supplemented by fault liability principle, which not only conforms to the development trend of international legislation, but also better adapts to the legislative purpose of protecting the legitimate rights and interests of contract parties and maintaining social and economic order.

Third, the exemption of liability for breach of contract.

The so-called exemption reason refers to the principles and reasons for exempting the debtor who violates the contract from the liability for breach of contract. Exemption is always associated with certain imputation principles and liability constitution, which are based on established imputation principles and liability constitution. Because the establishment of exemption is enough to overturn the judgment of the establishment of responsibility based on the constitutive requirements of responsibility, it is actually a denial of the application of liability attribution and constitutive requirements of responsibility. ⑤ Therefore, the limitation of exemption is a major problem in the process of imputation of liability for breach of contract.

Generally speaking, exemption can be divided into statutory exemption and agreed exemption. Statutory exemption is directly stipulated by law and can be invoked without the consent of the parties, including general statutory exemption and special statutory exemption. The former refers to force majeure with universal applicability, that is, an objective situation that cannot be foreseen, avoided and overcome; The latter refers to other exemptions provided by law. With regard to special statutory exemptions, the main provisions of China's Contract Law are as follows: Article 3 1 1 stipulates that "if the goods are damaged or lost during transportation, the carrier shall be liable for damages, but the carrier shall not be liable for damages if it proves that the damage or loss of the goods is caused by force majeure, the natural nature or reasonable loss of the goods itself and the fault of the shipper or consignee"; Paragraph 2 of Article 394 stipulates that "if the goods deteriorate or are damaged due to the nature and packaging of the goods that are not in conformity with the agreement or the expiration of the effective storage period, the safekeeping party shall not be liable for damages"; Article 1 19 stipulates that "after one party breaches the contract, the other party shall take appropriate measures to prevent the loss from expanding; If appropriate measures are not taken to cause the loss to expand, no compensation shall be claimed for the expanded loss. " The agreed exemption reason refers to the situation that the parties agree to be exempted from liability in the contract, which is called exemption clause. In principle, when there is no invalid reason for the agreement between the two parties, its validity should be recognized. However, the exemption clause shall not violate the mandatory provisions of the law and the public interest, otherwise it will be invalid. Article 53 of China's Contract Law stipulates that the exemption clause for personal injury or property loss caused by intentional or gross negligence is invalid. Article 40 stipulates that an exemption clause that exempts the party providing the format clause from responsibility, aggravates the other party's responsibility and excludes the other party's rights is invalid.

It should be said that China's "Contract Law" has formed an exemption system, but it cannot be said to be perfect. If there is no typical exemption for the failure of contract purpose, all these need to be explored and studied in future legislation and judicial practice.

The imputation principle of civil liability? Article 106 of the General Principles of Civil Law of our country expounds the principle of imputation. In China, the imputation principle system of civil liability consists of fault liability principle, no-fault liability principle and fair liability principle. Fault presumption is a way to apply the principle of fault liability. Please don't mislead the upstairs!

(a) the principle of fault liability is the principle of taking responsibility for the fault of the actor. No fault means no responsibility. Paragraph 2 of Article 106 of General Principles of Civil Law is the general provision of this principle. Fault presumption is a way to apply the principle of fault liability. It presumes that the actor is subjectively at fault according to the occurrence of damage facts, and can only be exempted from responsibility if the main actor proves that he is not at fault.

(2) The principle of no-fault liability is the principle of imputation, which does not judge whether the actor should bear civil liability by whether there is fault or not under the circumstances stipulated by law. Paragraph 3 of Article 106 of General Principles of Civil Law is the general provision of this principle.

(3) The principle of fair liability refers to the principle of distributing damages among the parties in accordance with the principle of fairness when the principle of no-fault liability is not stipulated in the law and the principle of fault liability is applied under obviously unfair circumstances. There are three provisions in General Principles of Civil Law and People's Republic of China (PRC) Opinions that embody the principle of fair liability: Article 132 of General Principles of Civil Law, Article 155 and Article 157 of People's Republic of China (PRC) Opinions. I hope this solution can help you!

On the principle of product liability, different subjects have different principles: 1. According to Article 4 1 of the Product Quality Law, the producer shall be liable for personal injury and property other than defective products (hereinafter referred to as other people's property), which is the principle of no-fault liability. 2. According to Article 42 of the Product Quality Law, if the product is defective due to the fault of the seller, causing personal injury or property loss to others, the seller shall be liable for compensation. If the seller cannot specify the producer or supplier of the defective product, the seller shall be liable for compensation. "-this is the principle of presumption of fault.