重塑破產程序中的待履行合同──以“限縮的功能主義”為視角

Reform Executory Contract in Bankruptcy Proceedings: from Restricted Functional Approach

明確待履行合同的定義是有效解決破產程序中待履行合同處理問題的基礎和關鍵。就待履行合同的界定問題，美國破產法學界形成了兩種主要標準，即實質違約標準與功能主義路徑。實質違約標準與我國合同法關於違約形態的相關規定相抵牾，將導致問題的爭議轉為何為實質違約。我國理論界現有的通過區分給付義務與附隨義務的方式判斷合同義務是否已履行完畢的路徑與待履行合同選擇權這一制度的內在價值並不相符，且合同法上的義務群問題本身在民法領域也面臨爭議。功能主義路徑有一定的合理性，但其固有的侷限性不應被忽視，且其內在邏輯與我國合同法理論不兼容。正確理解待履行合同的內涵，應採取“限縮的功能主義”，關注合同項下債務人義務的屢行情況，破產申請被受理時債務人一方尚未履行完畢其義務的合同即為待履行合同。功能主義可能導致的利益失衡後果則可通過“修正的拒絕履行模式”的適用有效避免。

A clear definition of executory contract is the basis of effective treatment. Two essential doctrines have been formed in the U. S. bankruptcy law regarding the definition of executory contract: the material breach test and the functional approach. The material breach test contradicts the relevant provisions of contract law in China and turns the dispute to the definition of material breach. The existing path of distinguishing primary obligation and collateral obligation in China is inconsistent with the inherent value of the executory contract regime. Meanwhile, the problem of obligation groups in contract law itself is also controversial in civil law. The functional approach is reasonable to some extent, but its inherent limitations should not be ignored, and its internal logic is incompatible with Chinas contract law theory. The ''restricted functional approach'' should be adopted to analyze the definition of executory contract. Therefore, attention should be paid to the contractual duty of the debtor, which means a contract that the debtor has not fulfilled its obligations is an executory contract. The consequences of an imbalance of interests that the functional approach may cause can be effectively avoided by applying the ''nodified rejection doctrine.''