涉外合同范本法律适用

1、涉外合同的法律适用（上）内容摘要：涉外合同的法律适用是指解决合同的订立和效力等问题所适用的法律。包括当事人的缔约能力、合同的方式、合同内容的合法性、合同订立的时间、地点以及当事人的权利义务、合同条款的 解释、合同履行与不履行的后果等整个过程的法律适用问题， 这也符合最高人民法院对合同争议的 解释。论文的研究就是在这个范围内进行的。整篇论文共分四章，第一章简要说明问题提出的原因，是伴随合同法的颁布，原来的司法解释是否应赋予新的含义，对此，许多人提出了不同意见，但分析不是很深刻。笔者认为，不能以合同法对涉外合同法律适用的原则没有改变就认为原解释应继续适用，应该考虑到十几年来国际国内社会经济的变化而

2、赋予法律以新的含义。 笔者还感觉到，随着我国加入 WTC速度的加快，在 涉外合同领域会有更多的问题出现， 而这方面正是我国比较薄弱的环节， 需要给予重视，进行深入 的研究，这也正是笔者作此研究的主要原因。论文在第二章主要阐述了合同法律适用的两组对立的理论，第一组是统一论和分割论的对立， 第二组是客观论和主观论的对立。前者反映了合同法律适用中对合同整体性和复杂性的不同认识；后者则反映了当事人意思自治和国家干预经济的矛盾。当今社会合同的分割论是主流，而客观论和主观论则需要有机的结合适用。在第三章主要介绍了合同法律适用的四个原则，包括客观标志原则、意思自治原则、特征履行原则、最密切联系原则。通过对各

3、项原则的起源、应用及社会评价，说明各原则的现实意义，并为 分析我国在合同法律适用中存在的问题找出理论依据。第四章是全文的重点，从我国关于涉外合同法律适用存在的问题入手， 通过理论和实务效果的 分析，为维护我国的国家利益和我国当事人利益，找出我国在新形势下应采取的改进措施。笔者的研究不脱离理论，但更注重对法律的理解，因为法律实务工作者不同于法学评论之处在于，对现有法律的理解比批评法律缺点更重要，不希望把对法律的批评写入法律条文之中，法律本来就是正义和利益的调合产物。在理论部分，笔者通过分析认为，我国以及许多大陆法系国家虽然在理论上接受了最密切联系 原则，实际处理都是以特征履行原则确定合同的法律适

4、用的。最密切联系原则更适合于英美普通法系国家。针对我国涉外合同法律适用中存在的问题，笔者在论文中主要作了以下分析：我国暂时还不宜加入1985年海牙公约。原因在于：1985年海牙公约在当事人未选择合同适用 的法律时，以卖方地法为首选，对于象我国这样的发展中国家是很不利的 ；因为我国要大量进口国 外设备等，这样做会减少我国法律的适用机会，对我国国家和当事人的利益可能不利 ；比较1980 年罗马公约，说明国际社会也不完全赞同海牙公约的规定， 而我国以特征履行方法确定最密切联系 地法律有利于保护我国当事人的利益，应继续适用。合同是否成立应适用合同成立的准据法来确定，并且法院地的强行法律规定不得违反。

5、原因在于：第一，依照合同法规定，涉外合同的争议应适用涉外合同本应适用的法律解决，涉外合同 成立也可能发生争议，应以合同本应适用的法律解决该争议；第二，许多学者的著作也同意这种观点，依据来自国外学者的理论，即合同成立与否，应以假设合同已经成立时依据合同准据法确定；第三，因为合同当事人可以选择适用于合同的法律， 那么合同成立本来就应该满足合同准据法的要 件；第四，缔约地法的观点有缺点，因现代社会缔约地具有偶然性，并且异地签约时合同的缔结地 难于确定。第五，至于合同的有效性，即使成立的合同也不能违反我国强制性法律的规定，这是各国的通例。而对于在双方履行中对合同成立的评价，必要时，应适用分割理论确定合

6、同成立适用的法律, 因为双方的履行本来就是对合同成立的认同， 不能以争议发生后，利用否定合同成立来否定合同的 效力。我国应承认当事人默示的法律选择。其根本原因在于：第一，从历史上看，杜摩兰在提出意思自治原则时，就认为法院应推定当事人的默示意向；第二，商人并非法律专家，其同意某种法律选 择可能因种种原因未能明确表示，不能因此否定当事人的选择；第三，国际社会普遍接受默示的法 律选择，第四，批评者认为默示的法律选择有时可能是法官替当事人作出的，其目的是适用法院地法。其实，这种批评不能阻止外国法官这种作法 ；但不承认默示的法律选择，也可能违背了当事人 的意思自治，而如果能确定当事人默示选择中国法律，

7、我国法院也可以多一个确立本国法适用于合 同的机会。管辖权与涉外合同的法律适用有着密切的联系。 在法院审判中，一旦管辖权确定，合同适用的 法律最多的就是法院地法，还不必说程序法和冲突规范的强制适用，这是不争的事实。因此合同管 辖权的选择比选择适用于合同的法律更为重要。 发生争议时，当事人最重要的是通过起诉确定对自 己有利的法院；甚至没有诉因时，也可采用“被动宣示”，请求法院判决自己没有责任。我国没有 这种规定，应考虑增加而允许当事人起诉。 另外，为尽量避免争夺管辖权和方便执行，应支持当事 人对仲裁的选择。为公平解决因争夺管辖权引起的争议， 各国还是会发生适用外国法的情形， 我国也是如此。但 在实

8、质意义上，适用外国法难于保证适用的准确性， 因为法官受本国法律教育，适用外国法缺少权 威性。当事人选择适用某国法律评价其间的争议，最好选择该国的法院或涉外仲裁机关。实际上，电子商务的发展会给涉外合同法律适用带来许多新问题，但研究所限，没能加以分析，只有待日后再做了。综上所述，笔者主要对涉外合同法律适用中有关最密切联系原则的应用、合同的成立、当事人的默示法律选择等基本问题进行了分析，并结合法律实务发表了自己的看法，其解决方法是否能够成立，有待于专家的进一步论证，并在实践中得到检验。AbstractApplicati on of law to intern ati onalcon tract re

9、fers to the laws that solve the problemsoccur in the sig ning and perform ing of the con tract. It invo Ives all the issues relatedto applicatio n of law， in clud ing capacity to sig n con tracts of the parties， the way tosig n con tract ， the validity of a con tract ， the time and address of sig ni

10、ng con tract and the parties? rights and obligati ons ， the expla nati on of con tract ， con seque nee of break a con tract. Such a defi niti on is in keep ing with the expla nati on made by the SupremePeople?s Court of contractual dispute. In this paper the author?s research work is carried out in

11、side the men ti oned scope.The article in cludes four chapters. In Chapter One the author gives the reas on forthe aris ing of the issue， that is， follow ing the Law of Con tract ， people hold differe nt opinions on whether new implicati ons should be imposed upon the former judicialexplanations.The

12、 author holds that the former judicialexplanations should not be appliedany Ion ger， eve n though the basic ruleson applicati onof law to intern ati onal con tractwere n?t modified in the Law of con tract and people should pay more atte nti on on socialand econo mical cha nges abroad and at home so

13、as to impose new implicati ons upon laws.Besides， I feel that ， if China joins WTO ， more issues will occur in the field ofintern ati onalcon tract where more research work will be n eeded. This is also the mai n reas on for my choice of research field.In Chapter Two the author expounds two groups o

14、f conflicting theories on application of law to c on tract. The first groups in clude Uniform Theory and Pick ing and Choos ing Theory; the second group includes Objective Theory and Subjective Theory. The first group reflects differe nt un dersta nding of the in tegrity and complexity of con tract

15、in applicati onof lawto con tract. The sec ond group reflects the con tradictio n betwee n Aut onomy of Will of the parties and interfereneewith economyby the state. At present , Picking and choosing Theoryoccupies the leadi ng positi on while Objective Theory and Subjective Theory work as compleme

16、ntary tools for an alyz ing.In Chapter Three the author expla ins the four prin ciples on applicati on of law to con tract , in cludi ng Objective Theory , Theory of Aut onomy of Will , Theory of Characteristic performanee , Theory of Most Significant Relationship. Through the in troducti on of thei

17、r origi ns and applicati ons and the evaluati on on them, I point outtheir practicalsignificaneeso as to establish the theoreticalfoundation for analyzingthose problems existi ng in Chi na on applicati on of laws to con tract.Chapter Four is the most importa nt part of the article. Through the theor

18、etic and practical effect analysis of the existent problems, the author tries to find out themeasures which should be taken in the new situationso as to safeguard the state interestsof our country and the Chin ese party?s ben efits.The author?s research is foun ded upon basic theories while lay ing

19、stress on the understanding of laws because, for one who is engaged in legal practice , to understand the existent laws is more important than to criticize them. Any way, a law is a thing that medicates justice and ben efit.In the theory part of this article , the author points out that , although t

20、hey have accepted the Theory of Most Sign ifica ntRelati on ship , China and many other n ati ons whichbel ong to the Con ti nual Legal Family use the Theory of Characteristic Performa nee in practice to dertimi ne howto apply laws to a con tract.In fact , Theory of Most Sign ifica ntRelati on ship

21、is more suitable for n ati ons of the En glish-America n Law Family.In this article , the author analyzes the existing problems on applicationof law tointern ati onal con tract as followed:For the time being , China is not fit for joining HaguePact (1985)。Hague Pact (1985) ack no wledges the law of

22、the place where the seller?s seal of bus in ess is located as the first choice whe n the parties of a con tract did n?t choose the law used by con tract. This choice is unfavorable for China who , as a developing country , needs to import many equipme nt because it will reduce the opport un ities to

23、 apply Chin ese laws while sett ing the law of the place with which it has the closest connection in the way of Characteristic Performanee can protect the Chinese party better. Besides, compared with Hague Pact(1985) , Rome Pact (1980) reflects that the internationalsociety doesn?t totally approveof

24、 the provisi ons of Hague Pact (1985)。Whether the con tract comesi nto existe nee or not should be gover ned by the applicati on law to the con tract which comes into existe nee and it should not deny the man datory provisions of the law of forums. The reasons lie in : Firstly , according to the reg

25、ulations in the Law Con tract, the disputes about intern ati onal con tract should be solve to thelaw applied to the intern ati onal con tract. There also may be disputes about whether the intern ati onal con tract is ten able or not which should be gover ned by the law applied tothe con tract.Secon

26、 dly, accordi ng to the Theory of foreig n scholars which is agreed withby many others , whether the con tract comes into existe nee or not should be gover ned by the law applied to the con tract whe n it is supposed to be ten able. Thirdly, since theparties to the con tract can choose the law appli

27、ed to the con tract, the ten ability ofthe con tract should meet the importa nt dema nds of the applicati on law to the con tract.Fourthly , the law of the place sig ned con tract has defects. Because in moder n society the place sig ned con tract has con ti ngency and the place sig ned con tract is

28、 hard to defi ne whe n the con tract is sig ned in differe nt places; Fifthly, as to the validity of thecon tract , eve n the ten able con tract should not be con trary to the regulatio ns of the man datory provisi ons. This is the uni versal law.During the performa nee of the con tract , whether th

29、e con tract comes into existe nee or not should be governed by the law which is determined by the Picking and Choosing Theory, because the performa nee of the two parties is ack no wledge to the existe nee of the con tract. Any of the parties should not deny the validity of the eon tract by denying

30、the existe nee of the eon tract after disputes occur.Chi na should ack no wledge the parties? implicit judicial choice. The basic reas ons lie in : Firstly , viewed through history , when advancing his Theory of Autonomy of Will,Domulin regards the court should deduce the party?s implicit intent.Sec

31、ondly , merchantis not law expert , his agreement to samejudicial choice maybe not explicitly instructed on account of various reasons. Therefore the party?s choice should not be denied for this reas on. Thirdly , intern atio nal society gen erally accepts the implicit judicialchoice.Fourthly , crit

32、ics th ink implicit judicial choice sometimesmay be made by the judges toapply the law of forum. Actually , this kind of criticism cannot stop foreign judges todo this. Pout the un ack no wledgeme nt of implicit judicial choice may also violate the party?s Aut onomy of Will. If the party?s implicit

33、choice can be defi ned as Chin ese laws Chin ese courts can have ano ther cha nee to apply Chin ese laws to the con tract.Jurisdicti onand applicati onof law of intern ati onalcon tract have close conn ecti ons.In the court trial , once the jurisdiction is defined , the law most often applied to the

34、 con tract is the law of forum , in cludi ng its procedural law and con flict rules. Therefore the choice of the con tractial jurisdict ion is more importa nt tha n the choice of law forthe con tract. Whe n disputes occur , the most importa nt thing for the party is to decidea favorable court throug

35、h suing. When there?s no cause for actio n, the party can takethe negative declaration, asking the court to pronounce him irresponsible. There?s nosuch a regulati on in Chin ese laws; therefore a new rule should be added in Chin ese law system to permit the party to sue. To avoid the scramble for jurisdiction and to easy the execution , the party?s choice of arbitration should be supported.To equitably solve the disputes caused by the scramble