欢迎来到毕设资料网! | 帮助中心 毕设资料交流与分享平台
毕设资料网
全部分类
  • 毕业设计>
  • 毕业论文>
  • 外文翻译>
  • 课程设计>
  • 实习报告>
  • 相关资料>
  • ImageVerifierCode 换一换
    首页 毕设资料网 > 资源分类 > DOC文档下载
    分享到微信 分享到微博 分享到QQ空间

    法学专业毕业论文外文翻译--法国法律中的违约责任:在安全的期望值和有效性之间

    • 资源ID:129620       资源大小:76.50KB        全文页数:14页
    • 资源格式: DOC        下载积分:100金币
    快捷下载 游客一键下载
    账号登录下载
    三方登录下载: QQ登录
    下载资源需要100金币
    邮箱/手机:
    温馨提示:
    快捷下载时,用户名和密码都是您填写的邮箱或者手机号,方便查询和重复下载(系统自动生成)。
    如填写123,账号就是123,密码也是123。
    支付方式: 支付宝   
    验证码:   换一换

     
    账号:
    密码:
    验证码:   换一换
      忘记密码?
        
    友情提示
    2、PDF文件下载后,可能会被浏览器默认打开,此种情况可以点击浏览器菜单,保存网页到桌面,就可以正常下载了。
    3、本站不支持迅雷下载,请使用电脑自带的IE浏览器,或者360浏览器、谷歌浏览器下载即可。
    4、本站资源下载后的文档和图纸-无水印,预览文档经过压缩,下载后原文更清晰。

    法学专业毕业论文外文翻译--法国法律中的违约责任:在安全的期望值和有效性之间

    1、- 1 - 法国法律中的违约责任:在安全的期望值和有效性之间 The breach of contract in French law: between safety of expectations and efficiency 学 院(系): 专 业: 学 生 姓 名: 学 号: 指 导 教 师: 完 成 日 期: - 2 - The breach of contract in French law: between safety of expectations and efficiency Pierre Garello Faculte dEconomie Applique, Univers

    2、ite de Droit, dEconimie et des Sciences d Aix-Marseille, 3 Avenue Robert Schuman, Aix-en-Provence 13628, France Accepted 20 August 2002 1. Introduction: which path will lead us to a better understanding of French contract law? Contracts are marvellous tools to help us to live in a world of uncertain

    3、ty. They allow us to project ourselves into an unknowable future, to invest. Lawyers who have inspired the French Civil law and contributed to its evolution, as well as most lawyers in the world, have clearly perceived the necessity to protect that institution. The contract is, as far as the individ

    4、ual is concerned, the best forecasting instrument generating legal security, and the favored path to freedom and responsibility that is necessary for the flourishing of human beings in a society.1 Contracts are far from miraculous tools, however. If they make life easier, they do not necessarily mak

    5、e life easy. As the future unfolds, one or both contracting parties may be tempted, or compelled, to break his or her promise. But, the mere fact that the contract is running into difficulties does not force the law to do something!2 It is only when one of the parties does not perform that the law (

    6、the court, the legislation), backed with coercive power, has to give an opinion, to decide the case. In order to do so some principles, or theories, are required to reach a judgment as to what is the best thing to do. The present study of the French contract law is based on the premise that, from a

    7、law and economics point of view, there exists basically two possible ways to address this concern: the first approach requires that whenever a problem arises, an assessment be made of all costs and benefits incurred by the parties. In other words, one must attempt to evaluate in a sufficiently preci

    8、se way the consequences of the court decisionor of the rule of law under considerationfor both parties as well as for third parties (including potential future contractors). The lawthenand more precisely here, contract lawshould aim primarily at providing the right incentives to contracting parties,

    9、 where by right incentives one means incentives to behave in such a way that the difference between social benefits and social costs be maximized. It will be argued below that French contract law sometimes follows this approach. The second possible attitude looks, apparently, pretty much like the fi

    10、rst. The guiding principle is again that the law should provide to members of the society the right incentives. But one must immediately add that the judgeor the legislator, or the expertis not in a position to evaluate and compare the social costs and benefits of alternative rules of law. He or she

    11、 just does not know enough. One does not know, for instance, all the effects of a rule that would - 3 - allow one party to breach a contract, without the consent of the other party. Indeed, even if the victim of the breach is promised a fair compensation, allowing such a rule globally might have a n

    12、egative effect on the very purpose of the institution, which is to reduce uncertainty. As a consequence, the law should adopt a goal less ambitious than the maximization of social well being. That goal could be to protect contracts, or, in other terms, to create a set of incentives that lead individ

    13、uals to feel confident that their legitimate expectations will be fulfilled. As pointed out, those two attitudes may appear the same, differing just in degree. The first one assumes more knowledge on the part of lawyers and legislators than the second. However, when it comes to practical decision-ma

    14、king, differences turn out to be important, because the more knowledgeable you think you are, the stronger will be the incentive to regulate the contract, and the lower will be the respect for tradition and customs on which daily expectations are based. The two approaches outlined above are well kno

    15、wn to economists. The first one is the so-called mainstream (Paretian) approach and underlines most of the existing economic analysis of law.3 The second one, stressing the problem of knowledge, is far less developed.4 We will call it the safety-of-expectations approach, or the Austrian approach to

    16、law and economics, because it can be found primarily in thework of the Austrian school of economic thought, and especially in Hayeks studies. The rationale, says Hayek, of securing to each individual a known range within which he can decide on his actions is to enable him to make the fullest use of

    17、his knowledge, especially of his concrete and often unique knowledge of the particular circumstances of time and place. The law tells him what facts he may count on and thereby extends the range within which he can predict the consequences of his actions. At the same time it tells him what possible

    18、consequences of his actions he must take into account or what he will be held responsible for.5 The reason why these two approaches are mentioned at the outset is that, when one studies French contract law, it is difficult to reconcile all of it with a single approach. True, the mainstream, neoclass

    19、ical approach, based on the assumption that rules be chosen that maximize social wealth (or, at other times, that lead to a Pareto-efficient outcome), can help us to understand an important part of that body of law. But, as will be shown, certain French doctrines cannot be reconciled with neither a

    20、Paretian approach, nor a wealth maximizing approach. In some instances, the lawseems to be more concerned with the safety of expectations. In the next two sections we will examine the main doctrines and rules of French contract law trying to identify those that are compatible with both principles and those that are compatible with only one. If none of those sets are empty, it will mean that the French law of contract is not totally coherent; it cannot be brought under a unique unifying principle of


    注意事项

    本文(法学专业毕业论文外文翻译--法国法律中的违约责任:在安全的期望值和有效性之间)为本站会员(泛舟)主动上传,毕设资料网仅提供信息存储空间,仅对用户上传内容的表现方式做保护处理,对上载内容本身不做任何修改或编辑。 若此文所含内容侵犯了您的版权或隐私,请联系网站客服QQ:540560583,我们立即给予删除!




    关于我们 - 网站声明 - 网站地图 - 资源地图 - 友情链接 - 网站客服 - 联系我们
    本站所有资料均属于原创者所有,仅提供参考和学习交流之用,请勿用做其他用途,转载必究!如有侵犯您的权利请联系本站,一经查实我们会立即删除相关内容!
    copyright@ 2008-2025 毕设资料网所有
    联系QQ:540560583