《印度合同法》中不可能的“成文法”

Manasi Kumar
{"title":"《印度合同法》中不可能的“成文法”","authors":"Manasi Kumar","doi":"10.1080/24730580.2023.2173834","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The law of impossibility contained in Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 is a slight oddity in the common law world as it does not make any mention of the parties’ intention. While Indian courts have subordinated it to the intent of the parties, they have also insisted that it is a “positive law” that is unconcerned with the terms of the contract, which have been relegated, at least superficially, to Section 32 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 that only imperfectly deals with the vast terrain of impossibility. It is argued that the contradictory stance is, in part, the result of an unwarranted importance being attached to theEnglish debates surrounding the juristic bases of the law of frustration. It is also argued that the jurisprudence would benefit from delinking the terms of the contract, specifically the terms that do not constitute conditions precedent, from Section 32.","PeriodicalId":13511,"journal":{"name":"Indian Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The “positive law” of impossibility in the Indian Contract Act\",\"authors\":\"Manasi Kumar\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/24730580.2023.2173834\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The law of impossibility contained in Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 is a slight oddity in the common law world as it does not make any mention of the parties’ intention. While Indian courts have subordinated it to the intent of the parties, they have also insisted that it is a “positive law” that is unconcerned with the terms of the contract, which have been relegated, at least superficially, to Section 32 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 that only imperfectly deals with the vast terrain of impossibility. It is argued that the contradictory stance is, in part, the result of an unwarranted importance being attached to theEnglish debates surrounding the juristic bases of the law of frustration. It is also argued that the jurisprudence would benefit from delinking the terms of the contract, specifically the terms that do not constitute conditions precedent, from Section 32.\",\"PeriodicalId\":13511,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indian Law Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indian Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/24730580.2023.2173834\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24730580.2023.2173834","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

1872年《印度合同法》第56条所载的不可能性法在普通法世界中有点奇怪,因为它没有提及当事人的意图。虽然印度法院将其从属于当事人的意图,但他们也坚持认为,这是一部与合同条款无关的“实证法”,合同条款至少在表面上被降级为1872年《印度合同法》第32条,该条款只是不完美地处理了大量不可能的情况。有人认为,这种矛盾的立场在一定程度上是由于人们过分重视围绕挫折法的法律基础展开的英国辩论。也有人认为,将合同条款,特别是不构成先决条件的条款与第32条分开,将有利于法理学。
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
The “positive law” of impossibility in the Indian Contract Act
ABSTRACT The law of impossibility contained in Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 is a slight oddity in the common law world as it does not make any mention of the parties’ intention. While Indian courts have subordinated it to the intent of the parties, they have also insisted that it is a “positive law” that is unconcerned with the terms of the contract, which have been relegated, at least superficially, to Section 32 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 that only imperfectly deals with the vast terrain of impossibility. It is argued that the contradictory stance is, in part, the result of an unwarranted importance being attached to theEnglish debates surrounding the juristic bases of the law of frustration. It is also argued that the jurisprudence would benefit from delinking the terms of the contract, specifically the terms that do not constitute conditions precedent, from Section 32.
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
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Interpreting without bannisters? The abstraction problem afflicting the basic structure doctrine Courts, mining conflicts, and Adivasi rights: a case study from central India (2000–2022) “ Mutated Sumangali Scheme ”: challenges in enforcement of labour laws in spinning mills of Tamil Nadu Protection of stakeholders’ interests in the Indian corporate landscape: examining the “ifs and buts” The maze of interpretation: abortion laws and legal indeterminacy in Indian courts
×
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