從比較法觀點論契約之成立─以美國法及德國法為例

Formation of contracts from the viewpoint of the comparative law－ Focusing on American law and German law

簡瑋瑩(Wei-Yin Kan)

指導教授 ： 向明恩

國立臺北大學/法律學院/法律學系/碩士(2011年)

摘要

古典契約理論時期自由主義蓬勃發展，個人意思自由漸受重視，無論大陸法系或英美法系國家，皆以當事人間「意思表示合致」作為契約之成立要件。惟隨著經濟與科技的發展變化，此種契約成立理論及方式於現代社會是否仍然妥當，不無疑問。
觀察現行德國、美國及我國法規範，法律之介入契約，使契約成立不再限於意思表示合致一途，所謂契約即是當事人間意思表示合致之說法，略顯狹隘。此外工業革命後帶動產業升級，大量定型化契約及勞工團體的出現，使當事人訂定契約時，部分意思自由被剝奪，亦凸顯古典契約理論與現代社會之矛盾。
為解決此問題，美國學者麥克尼爾提出關係契約理論，於未捨棄意思表示合致成立契約的前提下，主張契約內容不再侷限於締約之初所約定之範圍，判斷契約成立與否時，應將與契約有關甚或契約進行中相關之社會關係，作為判斷當事人是否有受拘束意思的根據，故而於契約的成立上保留更多空間。相較於德國學者提出之事實上契約關係理論，關係契約理論之概念更能滿足現代社會複雜的契約關係。細究我國立法與實務，似亦有相同之趨勢。

關鍵字

古典契約理論 ； 事實上契約關係理論 ； 關係契約理論 ； 意思表示 ； 契約之客觀合致 ； 契約內容之合致

並列摘要

The law of contract gives respect to and protects the will of the parties during the Classical Contract Law period, because of the vigorous development of Liberalism. The countries of both Common-law system and Civil-law system at that time were fond of saying that the element of formation of contracts was“a meeting of minds.”But there is still an issue that along with the development of economic and technology, whether this theory of formation of contracts is still suitable for the modern society.
Base on the existing standard laws of Germany, United States and the Republic of China, the formation of contracts is no longer restricted in such a way. In other words, the contract may formatted not only by a meeting of minds but also by law. Furthermore, Industrial revolution also leads to the emerged of many labor organizations and standard form contracts show up. Parties has been deprived part of their will when the agreement was made. In the result it highlighting the conflicts between Classical Contract Law theory and the modern society.
In order to solve this problem, an American scholar Ian R. Macneil advocated the“ Relational contract theory.” The content of contract is no longer limited by the content which at the first time the agreement is made, a meeting of minds still plays an important role in the formation of contracts. This theory also emphasized that every contract should be related to the social features. Social relations which are concern with the parties when the contract is execute should be used also to decide whether the parties’will was constrained. And that’s why the classical law theory has inevitably become a remote core principle. Comparing with the “faktisch Vertragsverhältnisse” that was advocated by a German scholar Günter Haupt, “Relational contract theory” can satisfy the complex contractual relationship in the modern society. Apparently the same tendency was also observed in our country in courts and legislation.

並列關鍵字

Classical Contract Law theory ； Relational contract theory

參考文獻

Claus-Wilhelm Canaris著，林美惠譯，民事法的發展及立法－德國契約法的基本理念及發展，台大法學論叢，第28卷，第3期，1999年4月，頁337-353。

向明恩，德國締約上過失理論之發展，臺北大學法學論叢，第七十期，2009年6月，頁1-79。

林誠二，再論誠實信用原則與權利濫用禁止原則之機能－最高法院八十八年度台上字第二八一九號判決評釋，台灣本土法學雜誌，第22期，2001年5月，頁36-61。

姚志明，營建工程承攬契約定作人協力義務之性質—評最高法院九十九年台上字第一○九六號民事判決，月旦裁判時報，2010年12月，頁39-49。

陳聰富，誠信原則之適用範圍與效果－最高法院八十八年台上字第四九七號民事判決，月旦裁判時報，第7期，2011年2月，130-135。