欢迎来到人人文库网! | 帮助中心 人人文库renrendoc.com美如初恋!
人人文库网
首页 人人文库网 > 资源分类 > DOC文档下载

外文翻译--法国法律中的违约责任:在安全的期望值和有效性之间.doc

  • 资源大小:89.00KB        全文页数:14页
  • 资源格式: DOC        下载权限:游客/注册会员/VIP会员    下载费用:5
游客快捷下载 游客一键下载
会员登录下载
下载资源需要5

邮箱/手机号:
您支付成功后,系统会自动为您创建此邮箱/手机号的账号,密码跟您输入的邮箱/手机号一致,以方便您下次登录下载和查看订单。注:支付完成后需要自己下载文件,并不会自动发送文件哦!

支付方式: 微信支付    支付宝   
验证码:   换一换

友情提示
2、本站资源不支持迅雷下载,请使用浏览器直接下载(不支持QQ浏览器)
3、本站资源下载后的文档和图纸-无水印,预览文档经过压缩,下载后原文更清晰   

外文翻译--法国法律中的违约责任:在安全的期望值和有效性之间.doc

1大连理工大学本科外文翻译法国法律中的违约责任在安全的期望值和有效性之间THEBREACHOFCONTRACTINFRENCHLAWBETWEENSAFETYOFEXPECTATIONSANDEFFICIENCY学院(系)专业学生姓名学号指导教师完成日期大连理工大学DALIANUNIVERSITYOFTECHNOLOGY注此处按照实际情况填写即可,打印(宋体、小四)阅后删除此文本框。2THEBREACHOFCONTRACTINFRENCHLAWBETWEENSAFETYOFEXPECTATIONSANDEFFICIENCYPIERREGARELLO∗FACULTED’ECONOMIEAPPLIQUE,UNIVERSITEDEDROIT,D’ECONIMIEETDESSCIENCESD’AIXMARSEILLE,3AVENUEROBERTSCHUMAN,AIXENPROVENCE13628,FRANCEACCEPTED20AUGUST20021INTRODUCTIONWHICHPATHWILLLEADUSTOABETTERUNDERSTANDINGOFFRENCHCONTRACTLAWCONTRACTSAREMARVELLOUSTOOLSTOHELPUSTOLIVEINAWORLDOFUNCERTAINTYTHEYALLOWUSTOPROJECTOURSELVESINTOANUNKNOWABLEFUTURE,TOINVESTLAWYERSWHOHAVEINSPIREDTHEFRENCHCIVILLAWANDCONTRIBUTEDTOITSEVOLUTION,ASWELLASMOSTLAWYERSINTHEWORLD,HAVECLEARLYPERCEIVEDTHENECESSITYTOPROTECTTHATINSTITUTION“THECONTRACTIS,ASFARASTHEINDIVIDUALISCONCERNED,THEBESTFORECASTINGINSTRUMENTGENERATINGLEGALSECURITY,ANDTHEFAVOREDPATHTOFREEDOMANDRESPONSIBILITYTHATISNECESSARYFORTHEFLOURISHINGOFHUMANBEINGSINASOCIETY”1CONTRACTSAREFARFROMMIRACULOUSTOOLS,HOWEVERIFTHEYMAKELIFEEASIER,THEYDONOTNECESSARILYMAKELIFEEASYASTHEFUTUREUNFOLDS,ONEORBOTHCONTRACTINGPARTIESMAYBETEMPTED,ORCOMPELLED,TOBREAKHISORHERPROMISEBUT,THEMEREFACTTHATTHECONTRACTISRUNNINGINTODIFFICULTIESDOESNOTFORCETHELAWTODOSOMETHING2ITISONLYWHENONEOFTHEPARTIESDOESNOTPERFORMTHATTHELAWTHECOURT,THELEGISLATION,BACKEDWITHCOERCIVEPOWER,HASTOGIVEANOPINION,TODECIDETHECASEINORDERTODOSOSOMEPRINCIPLES,ORTHEORIES,AREREQUIREDTOREACHAJUDGMENTASTOWHATISTHEBESTTHINGTODOTHEPRESENTSTUDYOFTHEFRENCHCONTRACTLAWISBASEDONTHEPREMISETHAT,FROMALAWANDECONOMICSPOINTOFVIEW,THEREEXISTSBASICALLYTWOPOSSIBLEWAYSTOADDRESSTHISCONCERNTHEFIRSTAPPROACHREQUIRESTHATWHENEVERAPROBLEMARISES,ANASSESSMENTBEMADEOFALLCOSTSANDBENEFITSINCURREDBYTHEPARTIESINOTHERWORDS,ONEMUSTATTEMPTTOEVALUATEINASUFFICIENTLYPRECISEWAYTHECONSEQUENCESOFTHECOURTDECISIONOROFTHERULEOFLAWUNDERCONSIDERATIONFORBOTHPARTIESASWELLASFORTHIRDPARTIESINCLUDINGPOTENTIALFUTURECONTRACTORSTHELAWTHENANDMOREPRECISELYHERE,CONTRACTLAWSHOULDAIMPRIMARILYATPROVIDINGTHERIGHTINCENTIVESTOCONTRACTINGPARTIES,WHEREBY“RIGHTINCENTIVES”ONEMEANSINCENTIVESTOBEHAVEINSUCHAWAYTHATTHEDIFFERENCEBETWEENSOCIALBENEFITSANDSOCIALCOSTSBEMAXIMIZEDITWILLBEARGUEDBELOWTHATFRENCHCONTRACTLAWSOMETIMESFOLLOWSTHISAPPROACHTHESECONDPOSSIBLEATTITUDELOOKS,APPARENTLY,PRETTYMUCHLIKETHEFIRSTTHEGUIDINGPRINCIPLEISAGAINTHATTHELAWSHOULDPROVIDETOMEMBERSOFTHESOCIETYTHERIGHTINCENTIVESBUTONEMUSTIMMEDIATELYADDTHATTHEJUDGEORTHELEGISLATOR,ORTHEEXPERTISNOTINAPOSITIONTOEVALUATEANDCOMPARETHESOCIALCOSTSANDBENEFITSOFALTERNATIVERULESOFLAWHEORSHEJUSTDOESNOTKNOWENOUGHONEDOESNOTKNOW,FORINSTANCE,ALLTHEEFFECTSOFARULETHATWOULDALLOWONEPARTYTOBREACHACONTRACT,WITHOUTTHECONSENTOFTHEOTHERPARTYINDEED,EVENIFTHE3VICTIMOFTHEBREACHISPROMISEDAFAIRCOMPENSATION,ALLOWINGSUCHARULEGLOBALLYMIGHTHAVEANEGATIVEEFFECTONTHEVERYPURPOSEOFTHEINSTITUTION,WHICHISTOREDUCEUNCERTAINTYASACONSEQUENCE,THELAWSHOULDADOPTAGOALLESSAMBITIOUSTHANTHEMAXIMIZATIONOFSOCIALWELLBEINGTHATGOALCOULDBE“TOPROTECTCONTRACTS,”OR,INOTHERTERMS,TOCREATEASETOFINCENTIVESTHATLEADINDIVIDUALSTOFEELCONFIDENTTHATTHEIRLEGITIMATEEXPECTATIONSWILLBEFULFILLEDASPOINTEDOUT,THOSETWOATTITUDESMAYAPPEARTHESAME,DIFFERINGJUSTINDEGREETHEFIRSTONEASSUMESMOREKNOWLEDGEONTHEPARTOFLAWYERSANDLEGISLATORSTHANTHESECONDHOWEVER,WHENITCOMESTOPRACTICALDECISIONMAKING,DIFFERENCESTURNOUTTOBEIMPORTANT,BECAUSETHEMOREKNOWLEDGEABLEYOUTHINKYOUARE,THESTRONGERWILLBETHEINCENTIVETOREGULATETHECONTRACT,ANDTHELOWERWILLBETHERESPECTFORTRADITIONANDCUSTOMSONWHICHDAILYEXPECTATIONSAREBASEDTHETWOAPPROACHESOUTLINEDABOVEAREWELLKNOWNTOECONOMISTSTHEFIRSTONEISTHESOCALLED“MAINSTREAM”PARETIANAPPROACHANDUNDERLINESMOSTOFTHEEXISTINGECONOMICANALYSISOFLAW3THESECONDONE,STRESSINGTHEPROBLEMOFKNOWLEDGE,ISFARLESSDEVELOPED4WEWILLCALLITTHE“SAFETYOFEXPECTATIONSAPPROACH,”ORTHEAUSTRIANAPPROACHTOLAWANDECONOMICS,BECAUSEITCANBEFOUNDPRIMARILYINTHEWORKOFTHEAUSTRIANSCHOOLOFECONOMICTHOUGHT,ANDESPECIALLYINHAYEK’SSTUDIES“THERATIONALE,”SAYSHAYEK,“OFSECURINGTOEACHINDIVIDUALAKNOWNRANGEWITHINWHICHHECANDECIDEONHISACTIONSISTOENABLEHIMTOMAKETHEFULLESTUSEOFHISKNOWLEDGE,ESPECIALLYOFHISCONCRETEANDOFTENUNIQUEKNOWLEDGEOFTHEPARTICULARCIRCUMSTANCESOFTIMEANDPLACETHELAWTELLSHIMWHATFACTSHEMAYCOUNTONANDTHEREBYEXTENDSTHERANGEWITHINWHICHHECANPREDICTTHECONSEQUENCESOFHISACTIONSATTHESAMETIMEITTELLSHIMWHATPOSSIBLECONSEQUENCESOFHISACTIONSHEMUSTTAKEINTOACCOUNTORWHATHEWILLBEHELDRESPONSIBLEFOR”5THEREASONWHYTHESETWOAPPROACHESAREMENTIONEDATTHEOUTSETISTHAT,WHENONESTUDIESFRENCHCONTRACTLAW,ITISDIFFICULTTORECONCILEALLOFITWITHASINGLEAPPROACHTRUE,THEMAINSTREAM,NEOCLASSICALAPPROACH,BASEDONTHEASSUMPTIONTHATRULESBECHOSENTHATMAXIMIZESOCIALWEALTHOR,ATOTHERTIMES,THATLEADTOAPARETOEFFICIENTOUTCOME,CANHELPUSTOUNDERSTANDANIMPORTANTPARTOFTHATBODYOFLAWBUT,ASWILLBESHOWN,CERTAINFRENCHDOCTRINESCANNOTBERECONCILEDWITHNEITHERAPARETIANAPPROACH,NORAWEALTHMAXIMIZINGAPPROACHINSOMEINSTANCES,THELAWSEEMSTOBEMORECONCERNEDWITHTHESAFETYOFEXPECTATIONSINTHENEXTTWOSECTIONSWEWILLEXAMINETHEMAINDOCTRINESANDRULESOFFRENCHCONTRACTLAWTRYINGTOIDENTIFYTHOSETHATARECOMPATIBLEWITHBOTHPRINCIPLESANDTHOSETHATARECOMPATIBLEWITHONLYONEIFNONEOFTHOSESETSAREEMPTY,ITWILLMEANTHATTHEFRENCHLAWOFCONTRACTISNOTTOTALLYCOHERENT;ITCANNOTBEBROUGHTUNDERAUNIQUEUNIFYINGPRINCIPLEOFEXPLANATIONTHENEXTNATURALQUESTIONWOULDTHENBEWHETHERFRENCHLAWISMOVINGTOWARDSONE4PRINCIPLEANDAWAYFROMTHEOTHERHOWEVER,THISPAPERWILLNOTADDRESSTHISQUESTIONTHEPAPERISORGANIZEDINTWOPARTSINDEED,FORREASONSBRIEFLYMENTIONEDABOVE,ITISIMPORTANTTOUNDERLINEINAFIRSTPARTTHEMANYTHINGSTHELAWDOESINORDERTOAVOIDBREACHOFCONTRACTWHATCANBEDONEINORDERTOSAVEACONTRACTWHENTHEPARTIESAREHAVINGDIFFICULTIESPERFORMING,ANDWHATISFORBIDDENTHESECONDPARTDEALSDIRECTLYWITHTHEBREACHOFCONTRACTITWILLBESHOWNTHATFRENCHLAWDIFFERSINSOMEIMPORTANTRESPECTSFROMOTHERCONTRACTLAWS2SAVINGTHECONTRACT6WEWILLSTUDYTHEVARIOUSATTEMPTSTO“SAVE”THECONTRACTBYLOOKINGFIRSTATTHECONDITIONSFORINVALIDITYSECTION21,THENATTHEVARIOUSPOSSIBILITIESLEFTTOTHEJUDGETOINTERPRETTHETERMSOFTHECONTRACTSECTION22ANDENDWITHTHESTUDYOFTHECASESWHERETHEJUDGEISAUTHORIZEDTOCHANGETHETERMSOFTHECONTRACTSECTION2321INVALIDCONTRACTSONEWAYTOSAVETHECONTRACTISTOPROVETHATTHEREWASNOVALIDCONTRACTINTHEFIRSTPLACEFORMATIONDEFENSESASDEFINEDINTHEFRENCHLAWAREROUGHLYIDENTICALTOTHOSEFOUNDINTHECONTRACTLAWSOFOTHERCOUNTRIESTHEMAINDEFENSESAREINCOMPETENCYINCAPACIT,MISTAKESERREUR,FRAUDDOL,DURESSVIOLENCE,ABSENCEOFCAUSEREMINDINGUSOFTHEDOCTRINEOFCONSIDERATIONINTHEBARGAININGTHEORY,FAILURETODISCLOSEINFORMATION,LSIONADEFENSECLOSETOUNCONSCIONABILITY,7OR,MAYBEMORESPECIFICTOFRENCHLAW,ACONFLICTBETWEENTHEPRIVATEAGREEMENTANDORDREPUBLIC,IEPUBLICPOLICY,OR“LAWANDORDER”SEEART6AND1134OFTHEFRENCHCIVILCODE,HENCEFORTHCCIVINALLTHESEINSTANCES,ANACTIONMAYBETAKENFORANNULMENTOFTHECONTRACT,THEJUDGEBEINGTHEONLYONEENTITLEDTOINVALIDATEACONTRACTBUT,WHATEXACTLYISMEANTBYINVALIDITYINTHEFRENCHLAWWHATARETHECONSEQUENCESTHEFRENCHLAWDISTINGUISHESBETWEENABSOLUTEINVALIDITYNULLITABSOLUEANDRELATIVEINVALIDITYNULLITRELATIVETHEFIRSTCATEGORYINCLUDESALLTHECONTRACTSTHATAREAGAINSTWHATISCALLEDORDREPUBLICDEDIRECTION,THATISTOSAY,CONTRACTSTHATVIOLATEAPUBLICPOLICYJUDGEDTOBEBENEFICIALTOTHESOCIETYASAWHOLEANDNOTONLYTOTHOSEINDIVIDUALSINVOLVEDINTHATPARTICULARCONTRACTFORSUCHCONTRACTSNOTHINGCANBEDONEANDCOMPLETENULLITYCANNOTBEAVOIDEDTHESECONDCATEGORYISMADEOFCONTRACTSTHATVIOLATETHEORDREPUBLICDEPROTECTION,THATIS,CONTRACTSINWHICHONEPARTYDOESNOTRESPECTAPUBLICPOLICYDESIGNEDTOPROTECTWEAKERPARTIESINTHOSECIRCUMSTANCES,THEVICTIMWHOTHELAWISTRYINGTOPROTECTMAYCHOOSETOLETTHECONTRACTSTANDAFTERMODIFICATIONSTOTHECONTRACT8INBOTHCASES,HOWEVER,THERESULTISASIFTHECONTRACTHADNEVEREXISTED,ANDRETROACTIVITYWITHRESTITUTIONISTHEGENERALPRINCIPLEONEISSUPPOSEDTOGOBACKTOTHESITUATIONTHATPREVAILEDBEFORETHECONTRACTWASCREATEDTHESTATUSQUOANTEPARTIESARERELIEVEDOFTHEIROBLIGATIONS,ANDDAMAGESCANNOLONGERBEAWARDED,BUTITISSTILLPOSSIBLETOBRINGATORTLAWACTION9FROMANECONOMICPOINTOFVIEW,MOSTOFTHEFORMATIONDEFENSESMENTIONEDHAVEALREADY

注意事项

本文(外文翻译--法国法律中的违约责任:在安全的期望值和有效性之间.doc)为本站会员(英文资料库)主动上传,人人文库网仅提供信息存储空间,仅对用户上传内容的表现方式做保护处理,对上载内容本身不做任何修改或编辑。 若此文所含内容侵犯了您的版权或隐私,请立即通知人人文库网(发送邮件至[email protected]或直接QQ联系客服),我们立即给予删除!

温馨提示:如果因为网速或其他原因下载失败请重新下载,重复下载不扣分。

关于我们 - 网站声明 - 网站地图 - 资源地图 - 友情链接 - 网站客服客服 - 联系我们

网站客服QQ:2846424093    人人文库上传用户QQ群:460291265   

[email protected] 2016-2018  renrendoc.com 网站版权所有   南天在线技术支持

经营许可证编号:苏ICP备12009002号-5