Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Other Titles:||The Principles of European Contract Law and Good Faith|
|Issue Date:||2016-05-20 11:16:52 (UTC+8)|
Good faith is generally recognized by continental law countries as a fundamental principle in the civil code, while English law does not recognize good faith in contract law due to its abstract nature and its lack of clarity and certainty. Nonetheless, in American law, one of the Anglo-American laws follows German law in adopting the principle of good faith. This paper introduces the provisions regarding good faith in the Principles of European Contract Law, and the application of good faith in European countries. In so doing, this paper explores the debate over good faith in English law, and examines the reasons why American law applies the principle of good faith to its contract law. Based on the discussion of good faith in various countries, this paper further re-examines the meanings and the application criteria of good faith in the theory on which Taiwanese contract law is put to the table for discussion.
According to this research, good faith has exercised a great impact on continental law countries. It has been argued in certain cases in continental law countries with the claim that good faith is too obscure and uncertain, and may serve as a tool for an arbitrary court decision, although this was argued by the English lawyers. The reasons why the English and Continental law systems adopt different standings on good faith are based on their different legal systems, legal cultures, and legal consciousness in their respective countries. Without the principle of good faith, judges tend to be more hesitant in creating legal obligations and restraining the exercise of rights, which may render the court unable to enforce justice. The major contribution made by good faith to continental law is that judges, based on their concepts of fairness and justice, are capable of intervening in private law relationships between contending parties as needed.
|Relation:||法學評論, 104, 1-60|
|Appears in Collections:||[法學評論 TSSCI] 期刊論文|
Files in This Item:
All items in 學術集成 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.