查詢結果分析
相關文獻
- 最高法院與定型化契約法之發展--民法第二四七條之一裁判之研究
- 定型化契約條款的規範依據與管制方法--最高法院100年度臺上字第1635號判決評釋
- 論附合契約--最高法院九十二年度臺上字第九六三號判決評釋
- 進口蘋果權利標售與行政契約:評最高行政法院95年度判字第00815判決暨台北高等行政法院92年度訴字第5337號判決
- 附合契約與定型化契約之基本問題
- 信用卡定型化契約實務問題之研究
- 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臺上字第二八一九號判決評釋
- 定型化契約審閱期間之實務問題
- 定型化契約之管制與契約自由--德國與我國法制發展之比較分析
- 定型化契約條款內容控制的問題導向論證
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 最高法院與定型化契約法之發展--民法第二四七條之一裁判之研究=The Supreme Court and the Development of the Law of Standard Contract Terms |
---|---|
作 者 | 詹森林; | 書刊名 | 政大法學評論 |
卷 期 | 94 民95.12 |
頁 次 | 頁83-172 |
分類號 | 584.31 |
關鍵詞 | 定型化契約; 顯失公平; 誠信原則; 平等互惠; 自我免責條款; 加重他方責任條款; 他方棄權條款; Standard contract terms; Principle of good faith; Principle of equality and reciprocity; Exemption clauses; Aggravating liability clauses; Waiver clauses; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 定型化契約法之發展,與最高法院之裁判,息息相關。民法尚無定型化契約之一般明文規定前,最高法院相關裁判,已經扮演指導功能,該院七十三年第十次及第十一次民事庭會議關於甲種活期存款及乙種活期存款契約之定型化印章辨識條款效力之決議,堪為典型。一九九四年一月十一日公布施行之消保法及二○○○年五月五日施行之民法債編修正條文,特設定型化契約規定,但因訴諸「顯失公平」、「誠信原則」、「平等互惠」等不確定法律概念,故仍仰賴最高法院在具體案例中,藉由裁判而闡釋條文疑義、平衡雙方利益、防止濫用契約自由、確保實現契約正義。本文以最高法院關於民法第二四七條之一之裁判為主題,闡述定型化契約法之實務發展,並特別分析檢討最高法院關於「自我免責條款」、「加重他方責任條款」、「他方棄權條款」之裁判,以供學術與實務參考。 |
英文摘要 | In Taiwan, the development of the law of standard contract terms is very closely related to the decisions of the Supreme Court. Before the provisions of the standard contract terms came into effect, the decisions of the Supreme Court had already played a directive role, the 10^(th) and the 11^(th) Resolutions of the Supreme Court made in 1984 serving as an example. The 1994 Consumer Protection Act and the 2000 revised provisions of the Law of Obligations both provide regulations of the law of standard contract terms. However, these regulations contain ambiguous and uncertain terms and conceptions such as obvious unfairness, the principle of good faith and the principle of equality and reciprocity. As a result, the decisions rendered by the Supreme Court in specific cases are indispensable to clarifying the ambiguity of the provisions, balancing the mutual benefits of the parties, preventing abuse of the freedom of contract and ensuring the justice of contract. Based on the decisions of the Supreme Court, this article researches in depth the development of the law of standard contract terms. By virtue of analyzing and criticizing in particular the Supreme Court’s decisions in connection with exemption clauses, aggravating liability clauses and waiver clauses, this article wishes to provide both academics and the practice with constructive references. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。