根据《法国民法典》第1170条的规定剥夺债务人基本义务的实质内容及其救济

Y. Shandi, Osama Ismail Mohammad Amayreh
{"title":"根据《法国民法典》第1170条的规定剥夺债务人基本义务的实质内容及其救济","authors":"Y. Shandi, Osama Ismail Mohammad Amayreh","doi":"10.5539/jpl.v13n2p129","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In 1994 and thereafter, the French judiciary set a trend by utilizing the causation theory to revoke the exemption clauses of liability that constitute a violation of the contract’s essential obligations. This utilization was intended to restore economic equilibrium to the contract, in order to achieve the benefit each party seeks from concluding a contract. However, in 2016, the new amendments of the French civil code -which were issued by decree no: 131-2016- abolished the causation theory in general. Nevertheless, they retained the previous French judicial trend based on causation theory, where Article 1170 of the new amendments states clearly “any contract term which deprives a debtor’s essential obligation of its substance is deemed not written”. However, Article 1170 of the new amendments did not specify what is meant by an essential obligation? When does the contract’s term result in depriving the debtor’s essential obligation of its substance? Moreover, Article 1170 consolidates an individual penalty which may cause many legal problems. These problems are: the matter concerns an essential clause in the contract and not a secondary one, the other clauses of the contract remain valid as they have been, without any modifications or replacements and, in some cases, abolishing the clause itself might lead to further imbalance in the contract. Therefore, the legal provisions of Article 1170 should be analyzed in an analytical approach along with the previous French judicial trend with respect to these provisions. As a result, the research illustrates the urgent need to amend Article 1170 of the new amendments, in order to contribute to the stability of the economic contractual equilibrium.","PeriodicalId":90619,"journal":{"name":"Journal of politics and law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Depriving the Debtor’s Essential Obligation of its Substance and its Remedies under the Provisions of Article 1170 of the French Civil Code\",\"authors\":\"Y. Shandi, Osama Ismail Mohammad Amayreh\",\"doi\":\"10.5539/jpl.v13n2p129\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In 1994 and thereafter, the French judiciary set a trend by utilizing the causation theory to revoke the exemption clauses of liability that constitute a violation of the contract’s essential obligations. This utilization was intended to restore economic equilibrium to the contract, in order to achieve the benefit each party seeks from concluding a contract. However, in 2016, the new amendments of the French civil code -which were issued by decree no: 131-2016- abolished the causation theory in general. Nevertheless, they retained the previous French judicial trend based on causation theory, where Article 1170 of the new amendments states clearly “any contract term which deprives a debtor’s essential obligation of its substance is deemed not written”. However, Article 1170 of the new amendments did not specify what is meant by an essential obligation? When does the contract’s term result in depriving the debtor’s essential obligation of its substance? Moreover, Article 1170 consolidates an individual penalty which may cause many legal problems. These problems are: the matter concerns an essential clause in the contract and not a secondary one, the other clauses of the contract remain valid as they have been, without any modifications or replacements and, in some cases, abolishing the clause itself might lead to further imbalance in the contract. Therefore, the legal provisions of Article 1170 should be analyzed in an analytical approach along with the previous French judicial trend with respect to these provisions. As a result, the research illustrates the urgent need to amend Article 1170 of the new amendments, in order to contribute to the stability of the economic contractual equilibrium.\",\"PeriodicalId\":90619,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of politics and law\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-05-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of politics and law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5539/jpl.v13n2p129\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of politics and law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5539/jpl.v13n2p129","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

1994年及以后,法国司法运用因果关系理论,撤销构成违反合同基本义务的免责条款,开创了一种潮流。这种利用的目的是恢复合同的经济平衡,以实现每一方从订立合同中寻求的利益。然而,在2016年,法国民法典的新修正案——由第131-2016号法令发布——普遍废除了因果关系理论。然而,它们保留了以前法国基于因果关系理论的司法趋势,其中新修正案第1170条明确规定“任何剥夺债务人基本义务实质内容的合同条款视为未书面”。然而,新修订的第1170条并没有具体说明什么是基本义务。合同的期限何时导致债务人基本义务的实质被剥夺?此外,第1170条合并了可能引起许多法律问题的个人处罚。这些问题是:该事项涉及合同中的基本条款而不是次要条款,合同的其他条款仍然有效,没有任何修改或替换,在某些情况下,废除条款本身可能导致合同进一步不平衡。因此,第1170条的法律规定应结合法国以往对这些规定的司法倾向,用分析的方法加以分析。因此,研究表明迫切需要修改新修正案的第1170条,以促进经济契约均衡的稳定性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Depriving the Debtor’s Essential Obligation of its Substance and its Remedies under the Provisions of Article 1170 of the French Civil Code
In 1994 and thereafter, the French judiciary set a trend by utilizing the causation theory to revoke the exemption clauses of liability that constitute a violation of the contract’s essential obligations. This utilization was intended to restore economic equilibrium to the contract, in order to achieve the benefit each party seeks from concluding a contract. However, in 2016, the new amendments of the French civil code -which were issued by decree no: 131-2016- abolished the causation theory in general. Nevertheless, they retained the previous French judicial trend based on causation theory, where Article 1170 of the new amendments states clearly “any contract term which deprives a debtor’s essential obligation of its substance is deemed not written”. However, Article 1170 of the new amendments did not specify what is meant by an essential obligation? When does the contract’s term result in depriving the debtor’s essential obligation of its substance? Moreover, Article 1170 consolidates an individual penalty which may cause many legal problems. These problems are: the matter concerns an essential clause in the contract and not a secondary one, the other clauses of the contract remain valid as they have been, without any modifications or replacements and, in some cases, abolishing the clause itself might lead to further imbalance in the contract. Therefore, the legal provisions of Article 1170 should be analyzed in an analytical approach along with the previous French judicial trend with respect to these provisions. As a result, the research illustrates the urgent need to amend Article 1170 of the new amendments, in order to contribute to the stability of the economic contractual equilibrium.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
An Examination of Political Patronage and Maladministration on State-Owned Entities with Specific Reference to South African Airways: A Literature Study Integration Process in Central Asia: The Interaction of Nationalism and Regionalism Majority Voting – A Critique Preferential Decision-Making – An Alternative Contrariness of Laws in Contractual Obligations and the Role of the Will in Determining the Applicable Law in the Jordanian Civil Law Ghana's Legal Framework for the Constitutional and Statutory Application of Arbitration
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1