镜像规则及其突破

发布时间：2018-05-23 09:17

本文选题：镜像规则 + 格式之争　；参考：《西南政法大学》2011年硕士论文

【摘要】：镜像规则是普通法上的一项传统规则。依此规则,一个有效的承诺只能像镜子一样原班照出要约之内容,而不能与其有丝毫之不一致。作为普通法上的传统规则,镜像规则在合同案件中的运用由来已久,发挥了重要的作用。然而,现代合同法的社会背景已经发生了翻天覆地的变化。在现代商业活动中,格式合同备受青睐,得到了广泛运用。面对格式合同,尤其是对于商人间通过文件往来而进行的大规模交易,“镜像规则”日益显示出其弊端,不再适应现代合同法之发展和要求。面临如此窘境,“最后一枪规则”应运而生。然而,“最后一枪规则”并未突破“镜像规则”,仍旧是一种原始的解决方案。虽然在“最后一枪规则”之下,合同成立了,但仍然存在诸多问题。“镜像规则”和“最后一枪规则”都不能够满足现代背景下合同法律制度的需要,突破势在必行。《统一商法典》(UCC)首先在立法上作出了突破,其第2-207条就极大地突破了传统的“镜像规则”。UCC第2-207条的规定几经变迁。本文选取最广为引用的原UCC的第2-207条,引起我国学者关注的UCC第2-207条1993年修正案,以及2003年买卖篇重大修正后的现行版本进行了评述。德国和英国则在判例中逐渐突破镜像规则。德国联邦法院的早期判决中都采用最后一枪规则解决格式条款的冲突问题。但这一传统解决方案在判例中逐渐被动摇,形成了“相互击倒规则”。英国至今仍钟情于“最后一枪规则”,但是英国法院也并非一味僵化地适用“最后一枪规则”,而是在实践中有所变通来追求正义与衡平。丹宁勋爵也曾在判例中提出新的理论。在国际统一立法方面,国际组织也积极制定国际统一法律文件,以期为国际贸易纠纷提供法律解决途径。合同法上的国际统一法律文件主要代表为《联合国国际货物销售合同公约》(简称CISG)、《国际商事合同通则》(简称PICC)和《欧洲合同法原则》(简称PECL)。其中,笔者以CISG为重,分析了此三法律文件对“镜像规则”的突破。 1999年,我国《合同法》颁布实施,参照CISG对要约承诺规则作出了规定。2009,《最高人民法院关于适用〈中华人民共和国合同法〉若干问题的解释(二)》(简称《司法解释二》)由开始实施,其开篇第一条就对合同的成立进行了规定。与《合同法》相比,《司法解释二》对合同成立的认定更为宽松,与“镜像规则”相比,更适应现代的规模经济和大批量生产交易。但是,这种新的思路和方法仅以“司法解释”的方式做出笼统规定,缺乏具体操作中的细致规定,不够完善。对此,笔者提出了三项完善建议。
[Abstract]:Mirror rule is a traditional rule in common law. According to this rule, a valid undertaking can only mirror the contents of the offer and not be inconsistent with it. As a traditional rule of common law, mirror rule has been used in contract cases for a long time and played an important role. However, the social background of modern contract law has changed dramatically. In modern commercial activities, format contracts are favored and widely used. In the face of the format contract, especially the large-scale transaction between merchants through the document exchange, the Mirror Rule increasingly shows its disadvantages and no longer adapt to the development and requirements of the modern contract law. Faced with such a dilemma, the "last shot rule" came into being. However, the last shot rule does not break through the mirror rule, it is still an original solution. Although under the last shot rule, the contract was established, but there are still many problems. "Mirror Rule" and "Last shot Rule" can not meet the needs of the legal system of contract under the modern background, so it is imperative to break through. The uniform Commercial Code (UCC) first made a breakthrough in legislation, and its articles 2-207 greatly broke through the provisions of the traditional "mirroring rules" .UCC articles 2-207 have changed several times. In this paper, the most widely cited articles 2-207 of the original UCC, the 1993 Amendment of Article 2-207 of UCC, which has aroused the attention of Chinese scholars, and the current edition of the major amendment in 2003 are reviewed. Germany and Britain have gradually broken through the mirror rule in their jurisprudence. The German Federal Court used the last gun rule in its earlier decisions to resolve the conflict of form clauses. But this traditional solution was gradually shaken in jurisprudence, forming the "knock-down rule". Britain is still in love with the "last shot rule", but the British courts do not blindly apply the "last shot rule", but in practice to pursue justice and balance. Lord tannin has also put forward new theories in his jurisprudence. In the aspect of international uniform legislation, international organizations also actively formulate international uniform legal documents in order to provide a legal solution to international trade disputes. The international uniform legal documents in the contract law are mainly represented by the United Nations Convention on contracts for the International Sale of goods (CISGN), the principles of International Commercial contracts (PICC) and the principles of European contract Law (PECL). Among them, the author takes CISG as the most important, and analyzes the breakthrough of these three legal documents to the mirroring rule. In 1999, China's contract Law was promulgated and implemented. Referring to the rules of acceptance of offer made by CISG, the interpretation of the Supreme people's Court on the application of contract Law of the people's Republic of China (II) > (referred to as Judicial interpretation II) has been implemented from the beginning. The first article of its opening provides for the establishment of the contract. Compared with contract Law, Judicial interpretation II is more lenient in the recognition of contract formation and more suitable for modern scale economy and mass production transaction than "mirror rule". However, this new way of thinking and method only "judicial interpretation" to make general provisions, the lack of detailed provisions in the specific operation, not perfect. To this, the author puts forward three consummation suggestions.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D997.1;D923.6

【相似文献】