| In recent years, there have been many analyses of and controversies over various issues relating to the compensation for discretionarily termination of commission contract. The purpose of discretionary right in commission contract varies with the people who exercise the right and between gratuitous contracts and onerous contracts. And these differences should be taken into consideration when defining the scope of damages as well. Specifically, when the principal exercises the discretionary right and the agent benefits from the transaction, this benefit loss should be dealt with in accordance with Article 410 of the Contract Law, whether the commission contract is paid or not. When the principal terminates an onerous commission contract discretionarily, and such termination can be classified as impossibility of performance due to the principal, the agent can request future reward according to the risk bearing rule. But this reward is not regulated as a loss under Article 410 of the Contract Law. When the agent terminates a gratuitous commission contract discretionarily, he/she should compensate the principal's reliance interest in a way similar to that in the case of donation rescission right at will. When the agent terminates an onerous commission contract discretionarily, he/she is not liable for breach of the contract. Instead, he/she should compensate the increased costs when substitutive measures are available. Otherwise, he/she should compensate the damages resulting from the termination. Moreover, in some commission contracts that contain special policy considerations, such as consumer contracts and labor contracts, the scope of damages should be expanded or limited according to the relevant policies. |
京公网安备11010102006664号 京ICP备2023015853号