<p>Abstract</p><p>The use of standard agreements can hardly be overestimated in the society of today. The amount of standard agreements should barely decrease. One of the standard agreement’s main purposes, to make the concluding of the contract more effective, strongly agrees with the companies will to accomplish fast concluding of agreements using as small resources as possible A dispute that can arise in these contexts is that dissimilar standard agreements collide. Between nations this is called Battle of Forms. It is a situation of practice which is difficult to solve through the basic rules of contract law. The aim of the essay is to bring clarity into how the legal problems concerning Battle of Forms is solved in Sweden respectively Germany. Also CISG, Unidroit and PECL’s solutions of the same problem is going to be mentioned. A critical examining of the different solutions that the system of rules has in disposal will also be done. In the context of the situation an examination will show if there is any resistance towards these. If that is the case some parts of the critic will be presented. To be able to answer my questions at issue a traditional method of legal-dogmatism has been used together with comparative strains.</p><p>Sweden lacks a direct law-prescribed solution of Battle of Forms, nor is there a direct legal usage. Sweden has tried to apply the directions of 6 § AvtL on the problem, but this one suits the context badly. Besides the directions in AvtL some solution models are found which can build the foundation for a settlement. Consequently the problem remains unsolved in the Swedish legal system.</p><p>Neither does Germany have a legal rule which is directly applicable. Some guidance is however given from the German law. According to the German law the settlement should be settled with The knock-out doctrine as its foundation. When harmonising is not possible one should fall back on The Last shot or optional law, it depends on the occurrence of abwehrklauseln (protection clauses).</p><p>Neither has CISG directly pointed on how to solve the problem. CISG’s legal usage also advocates that The knock-out doctrine should build the foundation. What tool that should be used to fill the holes that the harmonising leaves behind is somewhat indistinct. It should be The last shot, optional law or an interpretation of article 7 about “good faith”.</p><p>Unidroit and PECL state that agreed terms shall be applied. Consequently the person applying the law should practise the Knock-out doctrine. However the rules give no guidance about how the arising holes should be filled after the harmonising.</p><p>Above all Swedish literature directs strong criticism towards the different solutions. The criticism is especially pointed at the lack of predictability and also at the risk of making arbitrary settlements. This of course depends on what kind of solution model that is discussed.</p><p>In Germany there has been, and still is, a solution which the person applying the law can use. In Germany protection clauses has an important role of the settlement. Even in these cases criticism is directed towards the solution. However the criticism is not as hardly directed towards the lack of predictability. Instead the criticism is pointed at the unsuitability of applying the optional law in some commercial relationships. And also that the applicability of the last shot results in a “ping pong” similar situation of passing terms back and force. Also in the international world of law some criticism has been delivered that agrees with both the Swedish and the German criticism.</p> / <p>Sammanfattning</p><p>Användningen av standardavtal kan knappast överskattas i dagens samhälle. Mängden standardavtal torde knappast avta. Ett av standardavtalets huvudsyftesyften, att effektivisera avtalsslutet, stämmer väl överens med företagens vilja att genomföra snabba avtalsslut med så liten resursåtgång som möjligt. En tvist som kan uppkomma i detta sammanhang är att olikartade standardavtal kolliderar. Detta kallas, internationellt sett, Battle of Forms. Det är en praktisk situation som med de grundläggande avtalsrättsliga reglerna är svårlöst. Syftet med uppsatsen är att bringa klarhet i hur den rättsliga problematiken kring Battle of Forms löses i Sverige respektive Tyskland. Även CISG, Unidroit och PECL’s lösningar på samma problem kommer att beröras. Det ska även göras en kritisk granskning av de olika lösningar som regelsystemen tillhandahåller. I sammanhanget ska det undersökas om det finns motstånd till dessa och om så är fallet ska delar av kritiken presenteras. För att kunna besvara mina frågeställningar, har det huvudsakligen, använts en traditionell rättsdogmatisk metod med komparativa inslag.</p><p>Sverige saknar en direkt lagstadgad lösning på Battle of Forms, inte heller finns någon direkt rättpraxis. Sverige har försökt applicera bestämmelserna i 6 § AvtL på problemet, men denna passar illa i sammanhanget. Utöver bestämmelsen i AvtL återfinns det ett antal lösningsmodeller som kan läggas till grund för ett avgörande. Problemet är således fortfarande olöst i svensk rätt.</p><p>Inte heller Tyskland har en rättsregel som är direkt tillämplig. Den tyska lagen ger dock viss vägledning. Avgörandet enligt tysk rätt ska ske med The knock-out doctrine som grund. När harmonisering inte är möjlig ska rättstillämparen falla tillbaka på The Last shot eller dispositiv rätt, det beror på förekomsten av abwehrklauseln (skyddsklausuler).</p><p>Inte heller CISG har direkt reglerat hur problemet ska lösas. Även rättspraxis i CISG förespråkar att The knock-out doctrine ska ligga till grund. Vilket redskap som ska hjälpa till att fylla de luckor som harmoniseringen efterlämnar är något oklart. Det torde vara The last shot, dipositiv rätt eller en tolkning av artikel 7 om ”good faith”.</p><p>Unidroit och PECL anger att överrensstämmande villkor ska tillämpas. Således ska rättstillämparen praktisera The knock-out doctrine. Reglerna ger dock ingen vägledning om hur luckorna som uppstår efter harmoniseringen ska fyllas.</p><p>Det finns speciellt i den svenska litteraturen en stark kritik mot de olika lösningarna. Framförallt riktas kritiken mot bristande förutsebarhet och även mot risken för godtyckliga avgöranden. Det beror givetvis på vilken lösningsmodell som diskuteras.</p><p>I Tyskland har det funnits och finns en lösning som rättstillämparen har att tillämpa. Skyddsklausuler har i Tyskland stor betydelse för avgörandet. Det finns även i dessa fall en kritik mot lösningen. Den riktar dock inte lika hård kritik mot bristande förutsebarhet. Kritiken riktas istället mot att tillämpningen av dispositiv rätt i vissa kommersiella förhållanden kan passa väldigt illa, samt att tillämpningen av The last shot leder till ett ”ping-pong” liknande översändande av villkor. Även i den internationella rättsvetenskapliga världen har viss kritik framkommit som stämmer överens med den svenska och tyska kritiken</p>

No abstract available. / Theses (LL.M.)-University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, 2013

No description available.

v anglickém jazyce The purpose of this thesis is to analyse europeanisation of private law. The thesis is composed of six chapter, each of them dealing with different aspects of the creation of uniform private law. Chapter One is introductory. Deals with the term of europeanisation of private law and focuses on its basic methods. Attempts to distinguish centralist and non-centralist ways of convergence in the area of european private law. The first subchapter describes unification of private law by means of international conventions and through european regulations and directives. The second subpart examines spontaneous process of europeanisation of private law. Ilustrates the creation of a european private law by legal science and education, drafting principles of european private law and is concerned with competition of legal systems. Chapter two explores if the unification of private law is needed and possible. Discusses positive as well as negative arguments of the unification in the area of private law. Chapter three describes several of academic iniciatives concerned with the creation of uniform private law. Chapter Four concentrates on european contract law. This part discusses the term of contract law, describes international instruments of its unification, focuses on consumer protection in...

En droit du commerce international, pacta sunt servanda se manifeste dans la règle de l’intangibilité du contrat. Cette dernière s’y présente de manière singulière. Sous l’influence de la Common law, la créance et les prérogatives contractuelles ne sont protégées qu’en fonction de leur utilité économique. En cas d’inexécution du contrat, la modification de ses stipulations est encouragée lorsqu’elle permet au créancier de minimiser son préjudice. En vue d’une allocation optimale des ressources économiques, le créancier doit parfois privilégier la survie du lien contractuel, à la sanction stricte de ses droits et prérogatives. La règle de l’intangibilité du contrat est ainsi concurrencée par la règle de l’effet utile du contrat. Cette dernière participe à la singularité du principe pacta sunt servanda en droit du commerce international. Le principe transnational pacta sunt servanda n’est pas qu’une représentation « systématique et synthétique » de la force obligatoire du contrat en droit du commerce international. Ce principe de droit transnational tire son autonomie vis-à-vis des droits étatiques des libertés accrues reconnues à l’arbitre international. Le principe transnational pacta sunt servanda invite à rejeter la nullité d’un contrat conforme aux besoins du commerce du international, lorsque celle-ci est commandée par des motifs étatiques particularistes. Cette protection accrue du devoir de respecter la parole donnée n’en fait toutefois pas un principe d’ordre public transnational. Pacta sunt servanda conduit plutôt vers la reconnaissance d’un principe de validité transnationale des contrats en droit du commerce international. / In International Business Law pacta sunt servanda presents itself in the rule of sanctity of contract. This one appears in a specific way. Influenced by the Common Law, contractual claims and arrangements are protected even if they have an economic usefulness. In case of a failure to perform the contract, the modification of its explicit terms is encouraged only if this allows the creditor to mitigate his damages. From this perspective, the debtor’s right to cure must be envisaged rather than breaching the contract. Sometimes, heading for the best allocation of economic resources, the creditor have to privilege the survival contractual relationship instead of its legitimate rights and “prerogatives”. This is how the practical effect of the contract competes with the sanctity of contract. The first one takes part in the peculiarities of the principle pacta sunt servanda. This transnational principle is not just a “systematic and synthetic” representation of the binding force of contracts in International Business Law. Indeed the transnational principle pacta sunt servanda gets its autonomy from freedom states law given to international arbitrator. When some nationalist motives impose to reject the nullity of a contract – although conform to international business needs - the transnational principle pacta sunt servanda invites to do it. Even if the duty to respect undertakings is firmly protected, pacta sunt servanda is not a transnational public order principle. Pacta sunt servanda leads more to a principle of transnational validity of contracts in International Business Law

The dissertation, while incorporating and building upon previous work of the author, aims to analyze in greater detail (both from an historic perspective and from a viewpoint of current trends and associated theories) the ever-repeating discrepancy between choice- of-law regulation of contractual relationships in the Czech Republic (or the European Union) on the one hand and the Common Law legal culture (especially the United States) on the other. Recent scholarly articles are also critiqued. The following major Common Law related tenants are extrapolated from a relatively extensive background of materials: (i) Conflict of Laws in the United States constitutes an interstate system as opposed to an international system utilized by European law. Duet he federal structure of the United States and the volume of interstate trade (trade between the various states of the United States) American Conflict of Laws retains a domestic character, (ii) Conflict of Laws is not governed on a federal level and the Supreme Court of the United States has repeatedly ruled that when a federal Choice of Law clause is warranted the state-level counterpart shall be used instead analogously, (iii) due to the aforementioned domestic characteristics and case law of the Supreme Court of the United States American Conflict of...

L'engagement est au cœur du lien social, aussi les juristes lui ont accordé une place considérable au sein de la sphère du droit ; le droit des contrats est le premier concerné. A côté de cela, il n'est plus possible d'ignorer le phénomène du désengagement. La place croissante de ce dernier a conduit la doctrine à se pencher sur lui, à s'intéresser aux règles qui prévoient en matière de droit des contrats une faculté de repentir. Compte tenu de cela, il nous paraît particulièrement intéressant de traiter de l' « engagement », en le confrontant avec son symétrique, le « désengagement ». Cela pourrait, croyons-nous, changer la façon dont l'un et l'autre peuvent être appréhendés. Et nous avons choisi de concentrer nos efforts sur les dispositifs issus du droit de la consommation, qui à nos yeux sont l'expression la plus forte de l'idée de désengagement contractuel. / On one hand, the commitment is at the heart of the social link, therefore the civil lawyers granted it a crucial place within the sphere of the law. It is particularly true for contract law. On the other hand, it is not possible any more to ignore the phenomenon of the right of withdrawal. The increasing place of the latter, led the doctrine to deal with it, to be interested in the rules, which plan regarding contract law a faculty to regret. Considering it, it seems to us particularly interesting to deal with the "commitment", by confronting it with its contrary, the "right of withdrawal". It could, we believe, change the way both can be apprehended. Therefore, we focus on the consumer law, which is, for us, the highest expression of the right of withdrawal.

This thesis is about corporate attribution in private law. Unlike human persons, companies are artificial legal persons. They lack a physical body with which to act, and a mind with which to think. English law therefore developed the concept of attribution so that legal rules could be applied to companies. Attribution is the process of legal reasoning by which the acts and states of mind of human individuals acting for a company are treated as that of the company, so as to establish the company’s rights against and obligations owed to other parties. This thesis examines the rules of attribution across the private law of obligations, focusing on the law of contract, tort, unjust enrichment, and selected aspects of equitable liability. Three main arguments are made in this thesis. First, there is a sharp distinction between the rules of attribution and the substantive rules of private law to which they apply. The former belongs in the law of persons, and it concerns when the acts and states of mind of an individual can be attributed to a company. The latter belongs in the law of obligations. Second, the same rules of attribution should be, and have largely been used across the entire expanse of private law. Regardless of the area of private law in which the question of attribution arises, the same question is being asked, and so the law’s answer should be the same. Like should be treated alike. This is normatively desirable, because it ensures coherence across private law. Third, it is therefore possible to state the rules of attribution that apply in private law. The acts of an individual A will be attributed to the company C where they were (i) specifically authorised (‘specific authority’), (ii) where A performs an act within the class of acts that A has power to do on behalf of C, even if A is acting in breach of duty (‘actual authority’), or (iii) where A has either been placed in a position or been held out by C such that a reasonable person in the position of a third party would reasonably believe that A had the power to act for C (‘apparent authority’). A’s knowledge will be attributed to C where it is material to the class of acts that A had specific or actual authority to do on behalf of C. Although commonly thought to be a series of diverse, disparate rules found in different doctrines and different areas of law, the rules of attribution form a remarkably coherent, consistent whole across private law.

A debate exists regarding the effect of labor protection laws on labor costs. Whether labor protection laws increase or decrease labor costs has implications for risk exposure of affected firms. If the labor costs go up, all else the same, the firm’s breakeven point goes up. Facing increased business risk, the firm must resort to strategies that inhibit the risk exposure, especially if the higher labor costs cannot be transferred, without adverse consequences, to consumers. The strategies include reigning in, if at all possible, operating leverage and financial leverage. Conversely, if the labor costs decrease, a firm’s business risk declines, and the firm has options to increase its operating leverage and/or financial leverage, lower the product price, or do nothing. By examining the Chinese firms’ reactions to the 2007 labor protection laws, we draw conclusions about laws’ directional impact on labor costs. We find that Chinese firms attempt to reduce business risk by lessening labor intensity, and labor-intensive firms are able to reduce the labor intensity at a significantly higher rate than capital-intensive firms. Neither group is able to significantly reduce asset tangibility. We also find that all firms significantly reduce their financial leverages. Consequently, firms’ investments, as measured by sales growth, decline in the post-reform period. These results are consistent with the cost of labor increasing as a result of the stricter labor protection laws.

Patients who have undergone treatment that has included the surgical implantation of a prosthetic device can become dissatisfied for many reasons. One cause for dissatisfaction is any adverse event where there is a demonstrable causal nexus with the failure of a device that is defective or at risk of being so. The magnitude of therapeutic product failure is considerable and therapeutic goods such as Vioxx, Thalidomide, silicon-gel-filled breast implants, contaminated blood products, cardiac pacemakers and valves, and orthopaedic devices are testimony to this. Many of these events have exposed a greyish area of Australian law that balances medical negligence with consumer protection and contract law. Australian product liability legislation that regulates the use of therapeutic goods is a complex amalgam of law that has at its foundations the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) and the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989 (Cth). When a surgical device fails there can be exposure to liability. This thesis explores those important issues that can impact on individuals or on organisations and it is evident that where issues of product liability concern implanted surgical devices the current regulations for consumer protection may not always be the most appropriate. It is evident that there is a culture of under-reporting of adverse events to a Therapeutic Good Administration that does not have the resources to investigate the cause for failure of a surgical device. Furthermore, there is a potential for bias and conflict of interest in an environment where the regulator depends on the regulated for the funding of its existence. Other issues include the complex and often undesirable consequences of those partnerships that can evolve with the development of an implantable device and with the undertaking of clinical trials, the role of the learned intermediary, that interface between manufacturer and consumer, and the role of the expert witness, that interface between justice and injustice. These and other matters that can significantly influence any debate of implantable surgical device product liability are explored and recommendations are made that might form the basis of a Therapeutic Goods (Safe Medical Devices) Amendment Act.