A regulamentação das hipóteses de erro no Direito Obrigacional foi objeto de profunda alteração em razão da nova redação atribuída à matéria pelo novo Código Civil e em razão do novo cenário desenhado pelo princípio da manutenção do contrato. A presente dissertação trata das diferenças entre a regulamentação do erro em face do Código anterior (1916 – “CC/16”, artigos 86 a 113) e do novo Código (2002 – “CC/02”, artigos 138 a 166). Além disso, a dissertação trata sobre as conseqüências advindas do desfazimento do negócio jurídico por erro, inclusive sobre eventual indenização. As questões propostas e que subjazem esta dissertação são: em quais situações a parte pode requerer o desfazimento por erro? A existência de erro, somente, é suficiente para que se declare inválido o contrato? E quais são as conseqüências da invalidação do negócio jurídico? Há algum dever indenizatório? As respostas a essas questões serão umas, se analisadas a partir das regras do Código Civil de 1916, e outras, se respondidas com base nas regras do Código Civil de 2002. A dissertação analisa o fato de, em regra, a doutrina apontar como modificação do novo Código Civil a introdução do princípio da proteção da confiança daquele que não agiu em erro. Na verdade, no entanto, essa proteção já era implementada na vigência do Código Civil anterior (CC/16), por meio do dever de indenizar. Portanto, a proteção da outra parte não é novidade introduzida pelo novo Código Civil (CC/02). A tese exposta nesta dissertação aponta para o fato de que, além da proteção da outra parte, a lei protege o contrato em si, como uma forma de proteger o comércio, ou seja, todos os demais contratos que dependem dele, direta ou indiretamente. E essa proteção é colocada em prática ao se dificultar o desfazimento do negócio jurídico por erro. Nesse sentido, o novo Código Civil inovou ao acrescentar um outro requisito para o desfazimento do negócio por erro: a sua recognoscibilidade. / The regulation of the hypotheses of mistake in Contract Law has suffered deep modifications due to the new wording of the new Civil Code and the new scenario drafted by the principle of maintenance of the contract. The presented thesis covers the differences between the old regulation supported by the old Civil Code (1916 – “CC/16”, articles 86 to 113) and the new one (2002 – “CC/02”, articles 138 to 166). Besides that, it deals with the consequences of the extinguishment of the contract due to mistake, including the possibility of indemnification of the other party. The questions posed, which are beneath this thesis, are: in which situations a party may avoid a contract for mistake? The existence of the mistake, solely, is enough to make the contract unenforceable? And what are the consequences? Is there any duty of indemnification? The answers will be different according to the rules of the Civil Code of 1916 and the 2002 one. In general, writers have pointed out as the modification introduced by the new Civil Code the protection of the other party that has not acted in mistake. Actually, this protection has been in evidence since the old Civil Code (CC/16), what was put into practice throughout the duty of indemnification. Thus, the protection of the other party is not the change introduced by the new Civil Code (CC/02). The point is that the new law, besides protecting the other party, protects also the contract itself, as a means of protection of the market, or, in other words, all other contractual relations that depend on it, direct or indirectly. And this protection is put into practice by making more difficult to terminate the contract for mistake. In this sense, the new Civil Code added one more requisite: the recognosibility of the mistake.

A regulamentação das hipóteses de erro no Direito Obrigacional foi objeto de profunda alteração em razão da nova redação atribuída à matéria pelo novo Código Civil e em razão do novo cenário desenhado pelo princípio da manutenção do contrato. A presente dissertação trata das diferenças entre a regulamentação do erro em face do Código anterior (1916 – “CC/16”, artigos 86 a 113) e do novo Código (2002 – “CC/02”, artigos 138 a 166). Além disso, a dissertação trata sobre as conseqüências advindas do desfazimento do negócio jurídico por erro, inclusive sobre eventual indenização. As questões propostas e que subjazem esta dissertação são: em quais situações a parte pode requerer o desfazimento por erro? A existência de erro, somente, é suficiente para que se declare inválido o contrato? E quais são as conseqüências da invalidação do negócio jurídico? Há algum dever indenizatório? As respostas a essas questões serão umas, se analisadas a partir das regras do Código Civil de 1916, e outras, se respondidas com base nas regras do Código Civil de 2002. A dissertação analisa o fato de, em regra, a doutrina apontar como modificação do novo Código Civil a introdução do princípio da proteção da confiança daquele que não agiu em erro. Na verdade, no entanto, essa proteção já era implementada na vigência do Código Civil anterior (CC/16), por meio do dever de indenizar. Portanto, a proteção da outra parte não é novidade introduzida pelo novo Código Civil (CC/02). A tese exposta nesta dissertação aponta para o fato de que, além da proteção da outra parte, a lei protege o contrato em si, como uma forma de proteger o comércio, ou seja, todos os demais contratos que dependem dele, direta ou indiretamente. E essa proteção é colocada em prática ao se dificultar o desfazimento do negócio jurídico por erro. Nesse sentido, o novo Código Civil inovou ao acrescentar um outro requisito para o desfazimento do negócio por erro: a sua recognoscibilidade. / The regulation of the hypotheses of mistake in Contract Law has suffered deep modifications due to the new wording of the new Civil Code and the new scenario drafted by the principle of maintenance of the contract. The presented thesis covers the differences between the old regulation supported by the old Civil Code (1916 – “CC/16”, articles 86 to 113) and the new one (2002 – “CC/02”, articles 138 to 166). Besides that, it deals with the consequences of the extinguishment of the contract due to mistake, including the possibility of indemnification of the other party. The questions posed, which are beneath this thesis, are: in which situations a party may avoid a contract for mistake? The existence of the mistake, solely, is enough to make the contract unenforceable? And what are the consequences? Is there any duty of indemnification? The answers will be different according to the rules of the Civil Code of 1916 and the 2002 one. In general, writers have pointed out as the modification introduced by the new Civil Code the protection of the other party that has not acted in mistake. Actually, this protection has been in evidence since the old Civil Code (CC/16), what was put into practice throughout the duty of indemnification. Thus, the protection of the other party is not the change introduced by the new Civil Code (CC/02). The point is that the new law, besides protecting the other party, protects also the contract itself, as a means of protection of the market, or, in other words, all other contractual relations that depend on it, direct or indirectly. And this protection is put into practice by making more difficult to terminate the contract for mistake. In this sense, the new Civil Code added one more requisite: the recognosibility of the mistake.

The French Civil Code on contract law was not renewed since 1804, so law enforcement was questioned due to it was not adapted to the requirements in a globalized world, and the constant economic and socia lchanges. In this article, the author analyzes the implications of the reform of contract law in France, which was influenced by two drafts. This reform has two characteristic features, which are the economic and social needs. About the first point –the economic needs–, these are evident in the contractual organization and flexibility. On the second point –the social needs–, these are evident in the protection of the weaker party, and the application of the theory of improvidence. In this way, contract law adapts to the demands of the twenty-first century. / El derecho de los contratos del Código Civil francés no fue renovado desde 1804, por lo que su aplicación fue cuestionada al no poder adaptarse a las exigencias características de un mundo globalizado y acediado por constantes cambios económicos y sociales.En el presente artículo, el autor analiza las implicancias de la reforma del derecho de los contratos en Francia, el cual fue influenciado por dos anteproyectos. Dicha reforma contiene dos rasgos característicos que se manifiestan en las necesidades económicas y sociales de los contratos. Respecto al primer rasgo, este se evidencia en la organización y flexibilidad contractual; mientras que el segundo, en la protección a la parte más debil y la aplicación de la teoría de la imprevisión. De esta forma, el derecho de los contratos se adapta a las exigencias del siglo XXI.

A regulamentação das hipóteses de erro no Direito Obrigacional foi objeto de profunda alteração em razão da nova redação atribuída à matéria pelo novo Código Civil e em razão do novo cenário desenhado pelo princípio da manutenção do contrato. A presente dissertação trata das diferenças entre a regulamentação do erro em face do Código anterior (1916 – “CC/16”, artigos 86 a 113) e do novo Código (2002 – “CC/02”, artigos 138 a 166). Além disso, a dissertação trata sobre as conseqüências advindas do desfazimento do negócio jurídico por erro, inclusive sobre eventual indenização. As questões propostas e que subjazem esta dissertação são: em quais situações a parte pode requerer o desfazimento por erro? A existência de erro, somente, é suficiente para que se declare inválido o contrato? E quais são as conseqüências da invalidação do negócio jurídico? Há algum dever indenizatório? As respostas a essas questões serão umas, se analisadas a partir das regras do Código Civil de 1916, e outras, se respondidas com base nas regras do Código Civil de 2002. A dissertação analisa o fato de, em regra, a doutrina apontar como modificação do novo Código Civil a introdução do princípio da proteção da confiança daquele que não agiu em erro. Na verdade, no entanto, essa proteção já era implementada na vigência do Código Civil anterior (CC/16), por meio do dever de indenizar. Portanto, a proteção da outra parte não é novidade introduzida pelo novo Código Civil (CC/02). A tese exposta nesta dissertação aponta para o fato de que, além da proteção da outra parte, a lei protege o contrato em si, como uma forma de proteger o comércio, ou seja, todos os demais contratos que dependem dele, direta ou indiretamente. E essa proteção é colocada em prática ao se dificultar o desfazimento do negócio jurídico por erro. Nesse sentido, o novo Código Civil inovou ao acrescentar um outro requisito para o desfazimento do negócio por erro: a sua recognoscibilidade. / The regulation of the hypotheses of mistake in Contract Law has suffered deep modifications due to the new wording of the new Civil Code and the new scenario drafted by the principle of maintenance of the contract. The presented thesis covers the differences between the old regulation supported by the old Civil Code (1916 – “CC/16”, articles 86 to 113) and the new one (2002 – “CC/02”, articles 138 to 166). Besides that, it deals with the consequences of the extinguishment of the contract due to mistake, including the possibility of indemnification of the other party. The questions posed, which are beneath this thesis, are: in which situations a party may avoid a contract for mistake? The existence of the mistake, solely, is enough to make the contract unenforceable? And what are the consequences? Is there any duty of indemnification? The answers will be different according to the rules of the Civil Code of 1916 and the 2002 one. In general, writers have pointed out as the modification introduced by the new Civil Code the protection of the other party that has not acted in mistake. Actually, this protection has been in evidence since the old Civil Code (CC/16), what was put into practice throughout the duty of indemnification. Thus, the protection of the other party is not the change introduced by the new Civil Code (CC/02). The point is that the new law, besides protecting the other party, protects also the contract itself, as a means of protection of the market, or, in other words, all other contractual relations that depend on it, direct or indirectly. And this protection is put into practice by making more difficult to terminate the contract for mistake. In this sense, the new Civil Code added one more requisite: the recognosibility of the mistake.

Le droit privé européen se construit progressivement, à la fois en tant que branche du droit, notamment à travers les instruments du droit de l’Union européenne, et en tant que discipline juridique, c’est-à-dire comme savoir juridique. Le rôle de la doctrine apparaît primordial dans cette construction (ou reconstruction dès lors que le jus commune médiéval est considéré comme un précédent). Au caractère fragmentaire et sectoriel des instruments du droit de l’Union européenne touchant au droit privé, la doctrine a répondu en élaborant des instruments de droit prospectif qui ambitionnent de construire le droit privé européen comme une branche du droit complète et cohérente. Les projets publiés couvrent par exemple la théorie générale des contrats (Principes du droit européen des contrats, dirigés par O. Lando), le droit de la responsabilité civile (Principles of European Tort Law), voire tout le droit patrimonial (Draft Common Frame of Reference, dirigé par C. von Bar). La doctrine joue aussi un rôle dans la diffusion des concepts dans les différents systèmes juridiques (estoppel, intérêts négatif et positif, incombance,…). Cette diffusion est favorisée par l’apparition de manuels, de cours, de diplômes consacrés au droit privé européen, alors même que celui-ci demeure très incomplet. Quelle que soit la manière dont est envisagé le droit privé européen, la doctrine tient un rôle essentiel. L’omniprésence de la doctrine impose donc de s’interroger sur son rôle dans la construction, ou selon certains dans la reconstruction, d’un droit privé européen. / European private law is gradually built, both as a branch of law, especially through EU legal instruments, and as a legal discipline, i.e. as a legal knowledge, a jurisprudence. Legal scholarship plays a fundamental part in this construction (or reconstruction when medieval jus commune is regarded as a precedent). In response to the fragmentary and sectorial approach of EU legal instruments concerning private law, legal scholarship has drawn up several legal drafts; these drafts aim to build the European private law as a complete and consistent branch of law. The published drafts include general contract law (Principles of European Contract Law, edited by O. Lando), tort law (Principles of European Tort Law), and even the whole patrimonial law (Draft Common Frame of Reference, edited by C. von Bar). The legal scholarship also plays a part in the diffusion of concepts in different legal systems (estoppel, reliance and expectation interests, Obliegenheit, …). This diffusion is enhanced by the emergence of books, lectures, degrees in European private law, even if this law remains very incomplete. Whichever way European private law is understood, legal scholarship contributes in an essential manner. The omnipresence of the legal scholarship leads to question its role in the construction, or according to some authors the reconstruction, of a European private law.

Die Nutzungsrechtseinräumung in Deutschland und die cession in Frankreich sind Urheberrechtsverträge, die eine Verwertung des Monopolrechts des Urhebers durch einen Dritten ermöglichen. Häufig will der Urheber über sein Urheberrecht die Kontrolle behalten und der Inhaber von Nutzungsrechten hat ein Interesse an einem Nutzungsrecht, das bestandskräftig ist und ihm erlaubt selbst gegen Verletzer vorzugehen. Dieser Interessenkonflikt spielt bei der Bestimmung der Rechtsnatur der Nutzungsrechte, die diese Verträge vermitteln, eine große Rolle. Im Hinblick auf eine weitergehende europäische Harmonisierung des Urhebervertragsrechts wurde im Rahmen der vorliegenden Arbeit die Rechtsstellung der Inhaber von Nutzungsrechten in Deutschland und Frankreich unter Berücksichtigung der Frage, wie in diesem Verhältnis der Urheberschutz umgesetzt wird, untersucht. Ausgehend von dem in Deutschland anerkannten Dualismus zwischen Schuld- und Sachenrecht folgt aus den Drittwirkungen eines Rechts dessen Qualifizierung als schuldrechtliches oder dingliches Recht. Aus diesem Grund wurden eventuelle Drittwirkungen der im Wege der Nutzungsrechtseinräumung bzw. cession vermittelten Rechte anhand von vier Fallkonstellationen betrachtet, in denen sich die Frage nach der Rechtsnatur dieser Rechte besonders prägnant stellt: die Verletzung des Nutzungsrechts durch Dritte, die nachfolgenden Verfügungen über das Urheberrecht, der Zusammenbruch einer Vertragskette und die Insolvenz des Rechtegebers. / The Nutzungsrechtseinräumung in Germany and the cession in France are copyright agreements which allow a third party to exploit the monopoly right of the copyright owner. Often the copyright owner wants to retain control over his copyright and the owner of rights of use has an interest in a right that is strong and allows him / her to take action against infringers. This conflict of interests plays a big role when determining the legal nature of the rights conveyed by those contracts. With regard to a further European harmonization of copyright contract law, the legal status of the holders of rights of use in Germany and France was examined in the present work, taking into account the question of how the protection of the copy right owner is implemented in this relation. Based on the dualism, accepted in Germany, between contract and property law, third-party effects of a right determine its legal qualification. For this reason possible third-party effects of the rights conveyed by a Nutzungsrechtseinräumung or cession have been examined in four situations, in which the question of the legal nature of those rights arises: the infringement of the right of use by third parties, the subsequent dispositions of copyright, the collapse of a chain of contracts and the insolvency of the initial owner of the rights of use.

La hiérarchie des normes est une notion commune du langage juridique. Les conventions, à l’instar de la Constitution à l’égard de la loi, peuvent-elle entretenir entre elles des relations hiérarchiques ? Trois éléments feraient obstacle à cette hypothèse. L’effet relatif des conventions, l’identité de nature juridique de ces actes et, enfin, le fait que les conventions ne soient pas des règles de Droit mais des actes d’exécution du droit.Lever un à un ces obstacles qui ne sont pas rédhibitoires et démontrer que le contrat est une règle de Droit, autorise alors à admettre théoriquement cette hypothèse. L’étude du droit positif permet ensuite de confirmer que des conventions peuvent entretenir des rapports hiérarchiques. Tel est le cas du contrat de société à l’égard des conventions de la société contractante ou bien encore du mandat à l’égard du contrat projeté.Il est alors possible d’étudier les conditions dans lesquelles un lien de nature hiérarchique peut apparaître. Les conditions préalables à cette mise en ordre supposent une pluralité d’actes et la nature conventionnelle de ceux-ci. Les « éléments constitutifs » du lien hiérarchique supposent eux que la convention qui occupe la place de norme supérieure soit impérative à l’égard des parties à la seconde convention / The hierarchy of norms is a common notion of juridical language. Can contracts, like the Constitution regarding law, organize into a hierarchy? Three elements would put an obstacle in the way of this assumption. The relative effect of contracts, the juridical identity of theses acts and, finally, the fact that contracts are not rules of law but acts of law enforcement.Raising these obstacles one by one, obstacles that are not totally unacceptable, and demonstrating that the contract is a rule of law, allows then to theoretically admit this possibility. The study of substantive law confirms afterwards that cont can be organized into a hierarchy. This is the case of the society contract regarding the conventions of the contracting society, and of the mandate with the contract that is planned.It is then possible to study the conditions under which a hierarchical link can appear. The prerequisites for this hierarchical organization require a plurality of acts and their contractual nature. The "making up elements" of the hierarchical link are based on the assumption that the contract that holds the higher norm is with regard to the parties of the second contract

Après l’octroi des premières capitulations au début du XVIe siècle par les sultans turcs, de nombreux négociants provençaux fondent des établissement dans les principales places de commerce de l’Empire ottoman. Depuis l’Époque médiévale, celles-ci sont désignées sous le vocable d’échelles du Levant et de Barbarie. Ces termes renvoient également aux cadres juridiques développés pour organiser ce commerce international de grande ampleur. Dès lors, les marchands des échelles sont soumis à une triple contrainte résultant du droit capitulaire turc, des usages commerciaux et de la législation royale. En s’appuyant sur les capitulations qui garantissent la libre circulation des personnes et des biens sur le territoire ottoman, les négociants français développent des structures juridiques empiriques. À partir de la seconde moitié du XVIIe siècle, les rois de France essayent par ailleurs d’imposer une forme de dirigisme commercial, afin de subordonner l’activité économique à la politique royale et de la faire tendre vers le bien de l’État. / After the Ottoman Empire granted France access to selected markets starting in the 16th century, a large number of merchants of Provence established selling agents in the main trading ports of Levant. Since the Medieval period these ports had been called échelles of Levant, in the Middle East, and échelles of Barbary, in North Africa. These terms are also used to name the legal framework governing the international trade with these regions. Since then, the merchants of this marketplaces had to meet three kinds of regulations : local commercial law, regulations from the Turkish administration and regulations from the French Royal administration. French merchants developed new forms of enterprise based on the capitulations that ensured free movement of people and goods within the Ottoman territory. From the second half of the 17th century, the French royal administration tried to implement an interventionist policy in an attempt to control the trade and benefit from it.

Esta dissertação apresenta um estudo a respeito da interpretação do contrato de cessão remunerada de espaço para instalação de loja em shopping center, denominado como “contrato de shopping center”, visando à estipulação de parâmetros hermenêuticos que auxiliem na busca do seu conteúdo. Para isso, procede-se, em primeiro lugar, à devida caracterização deste contrato, em seus aspectos econômico-negociais e jurídicos, que são decisivos para o desenvolvimento do estudo quanto à sua interpretação. Em especial, manifesta relevância o estudo da sua qualificação jurídica, que parte das duas principais discussões percebidas na doutrina e na jurisprudência nesse tocante, a respeito da tipicidade ou atipicidade do contrato e da presença de coligação contratual nesta relação negocial. Expostas as características de cada categoria, compreende-se que o contrato de shopping center é um contrato atípico misto, que apresenta coligação com outros, para a consecução da finalidade socioeconômica do empreendimento. Tal qualificação tem repercussões na interpretação deste contrato, uma vez que atrai a consideração de fatores específicos no processo hermenêutico, em conjunto com a aplicação das normas legais sobre a interpretação dos contratos (arts. 112, 113 e 423 do Código Civil). Assim sendo, com base na doutrina e na análise de precedentes jurisprudenciais, especialmente sobre o contrato de shopping center, estabelece-se que o intérprete desse contrato deve observar a incidência das referidas normas legais sob a perspectiva de tal qualificação contratual, que atrai os seguintes parâmetros interpretativos: pela sua atipicidade mista, a preeminência das disposições contratuais estipuladas pelas partes em face dos modelos legais típicos, considerando a relevância dos usos e costumes na definição desse sentido, mediante o tipo socialmente formado, e a possibilidade de aplicação de tais modelos legais típicos, se não contrariar o significado próprio do contrato; pela presença de coligação contratual, a “ampliação” do material interpretativo, impondo a consideração dos demais contratos vinculados na interpretação do contrato coligado, e a maior relevância da função socioeconômica supracontratual exercida pelos contratos em conjunto para a definição do conteúdo do contrato na coligação. / This dissertation presents a study on the construction of the contract for the lease of premises for retail stores in shopping centers - named “shopping center contract” - in order to establish hermeneutic parameters that assist in the definition of its content. For that we will first characterize such contract according to its economic, trading and legal aspects, which are decisive for the development of the study concerning its construction. In special, the study of its legal qualification reveals importance in that matter: this qualification is grounded on two major debates perceived in the jurisprudence and in the case law in this subject - the characterization of the contract as “typical” or “atypical” and the presence of linked contracts in this business relationship. Once the features of each of these categories are exposed, we can understand the “shopping center contract” as a “mixed atypical contract”, which is linked to other contracts for the achievement of the socioeconomic purposes of the enterprise. Such legal qualification has bearing in the construction of the shopping center contract, as it draws the consideration of specific elements in the hermeneutical process, along with the application of statutory rules for the construction of contracts (articles 112, 113 and 423 of the Brazilian Civil Code). Therefore, based on the jurisprudence and on the analysis of case law, specially surrounding the “shopping center contract” in Brazil, we can establish that the legal interpreter of this contract must abide by the application of the aforementioned statutory rules under the perspective of such legal qualification, which by its turn casts construction parameters into consideration. These are: due to its nature as a mixed atypical contract, the preeminence of the contractual terms agreed upon by the parties vis-à-vis the typical statutory legal standards, considering also the importance of the customary practices in the definition of its content, through the socially formed contractual type, in addition to the possibility of the application of such typical statutory legal standards when they are not conflicting with the contract’s own meaning; and, due to the presence of linked contracts, the “enlargement” of the subject matter to be construed, which imposes the consideration of the remaining linked contracts in the interpretation of the contract at hand, and the superior relevance of the socioeconomic function of the union of all linked contracts for the definition of a contract’s content within its group.

Diploma thesis Innominate Contracts in Business Relations deals with a legal basis of innominate contracts in the Czech private law. It focuses mainly on so the called Modern innominate contracts. The purpose of the thesis was to answer whether leasing, factoring and franchising contracts should be codified. Consequently, it aimed to prove or disprove that the Czech legal regulation does not reflect the recent developments in business environment. The thesis is divided into two parts. In the first chapter an analysis is carried out on the legal regulation of innominate contracts in the Czech business law, civil law, labour law and international private law. The legality of innominate contracts and the applicability of an analogy is discussed in this part. Based on the Czech legal regulations and court decisions it was concluded that innominate contracts were valid and that courts may use analogy when deciding on civil or commercial contracts. The second chapter deals with the contents of leasing, factoring and franchising contracts. It concludes that there are reasons against the codification of the above mentioned contracts. The content of an operating leasing agreement very much resembles a rental contract which might be used for this kind of leasing contract.A leasing purchase contract does not present any new answers to issues which had already been dealt with by court decisions. The substance of a factoring contract -- assignment of a receivable is already regulated by the Civil Code. A franchising agreement involves parts of many types of codified contracts and interlocks with multiple legal areas. Moreover, all the above mentioned contracts are challenged by a fast pace of development therefore a codification could hamper the progress or it could become obsolete. Based on the above mentioned facts the thesis concludes that leasing, factoring and franchising contracts should not be codified in the Czech private law as separate contract types and therefore disproves the primary proposition of this thesis and subsequently infers that the Czech legal regulations do not reflect a recent business development.