《中华人民共和国合同法》第406条中表述的“过错”与“故意”“重大过失”相对应，强调的是受托人在履行委托合同过程中对注意义务违反的范围，而非主观心理状态。海上货运委托合同项下，“过错”不应独立出来成为受托人承担责任的要件，因为过错的因素已经包含在违约行为这一基本要义之中。将过错的举证责任倒置给受托人，在一定程度上等同于将违约行为的证明责任转移给了受托人，这可能导致委托双方利益的失衡。相关司法解释的制定应建立在对《中华人民共和国合同法》第406条准确理解的基础上，根据海上货运委托合同完全商事化的特点，明确海上货运委托合同适用严格责任原则，使司法解释中委托双方权利义务的规定达到“准立法”的科学合理的目的。%In Article 406 of Contract Law of People＇s Republic of China, ＂fault＂ is the counterpart to ＂intentional misconduct＂and ＂gross negligence＂ and focuses on the extent to which the agent violates the obligation of diligence in performing the commission contract, rather than its subjective mental status. ＂Fault＂ under the commission contract of carriage of goods by sea should not be separated as an important factor of the agent＇s bearing liability, for the factor of fault has been included in the basic substance of breach of contact. To invert the burden of adducing evidence of fault to the agent is, to some extent, equivalent to transferring to the agent the burden of proving breach, which may lead to the imbalance of the interests of parties involved in the commission contract. The formulation of relevant judicial interpretation shall rely on the true construction of Article 406 of Contract Law of People＇s Republic of China, adjust to the feature of absolute commercialization of commission contact of carriage of goods by sea, and clarify that strict principle of liability shall be applied to such commission contract, so that provisions in respect with each party＇s obligation and liability can meet the ＂pre-legislation＇s＂ objective of being scientific and reasonable.
展开▼
