Esta dissertação propõe-se a analisar as influências do contexto da relação contratual na delimitação das obrigações das partes. Sustenta-se que os contratos sempre funcionam em contextos sociais específicos, que influenciam o significado das relações contratuais. Analisa-se como o Direito pode reconhecer e valorar o ambiente social e econômico de certas condutas adotadas pelas partes ao longo da relação obrigacional. Trata-se, consequentemente, de uma pesquisa voltada para as fontes das obrigações, no sentido de se averiguar se o contexto pode ser considerado como uma fonte de efeitos normativos para a relação contratual, especialmente nas relações de âmbito civil-empresarial. O problema do contexto como possível fonte de efeitos normativos é apresentado a partir de duas perspectivas: a primeira, mais ampla, é relativa ao desenvolvimento da teoria das fontes das obrigações e da função exercida pelo contexto da relação no desenvolvimento do que hoje se denomina Teoria Geral dos Contratos; a segunda, mais restrita, é referente à delimitação das obrigações em uma relação contratual a partir dos elementos contextuais da relação. Ao final, procura-se demonstrar que o contexto da relação contratual se apresenta como elemento influente na determinação do momento em que obrigações contratuais são contraídas e na delimitação das obrigações contraídas. / This dissertation has as its central theme the analysis of to what extent the context of the contractual relations influences the delimitation of contractual obligations. It is argued that contracts always function in specific social contexts, which influence the meaning of contractual relations. This study seeks to analyze how the law can acknowledge and value the social and economic environment of certain behaviors adopted by the parties along the obligatory relationship. It is, therefore, a study that addresses the question of whether the context can be considered as a source of normative effects for the contractual relationship, especially in civil-commercial relationships. The problem of context as a possible source of normative effects is presented from two perspectives: the first one, broader, concerning the development of the theory of sources of obligations and the function exerted by the context of the relations in the development of what is now called General Theory of Contracts; the second one, more restricted, regarding the delimitation of the obligations in a contract from the contextual elements of the relationship. This study aims, in the end, to demonstrate that the context of the contractual relationship is an influential element both in determining when contractual obligations arise and in delimiting the contractual obligations.

À la lecture de l'article 2365 c.c.Q., le créancier et la caution ne peuvent pas percevoir les droits et les libertés que ce texte concrétise à leur encontre ou à leur profit. Pour pallier ce problème, les auteurs et la jurisprudence ont alors laissé place à leur imagination afin de tenter de classifier cette disposition à l'intérieur d'institutions juridiques éprouvées, le tout en vue de démythifier le contenu de la règle de droit. Pour notre part, nous considérons que l'exception de non-subrogation est une notion originale en soi, qui trouve sa source à l'intérieur même de son institution. La thèse que nous soutenons est que l'exception de non-subrogation, mode de libération qui a pour mission de combattre le comportement opportuniste, cristallise l'obligation de bonne foi en imposant implicitement au créancier une obligation de bonne subrogation. Tout manquement du créancier à cette obligation a comme conséquence de rendre le droit de créance du créancier irrecevable à l'égard de la caution devant les tribunaux. Ce précepte éclaircit le contexte de l'article 2365 C.c.Q. et, par le fait même, il permet de délimiter le contour de son domaine et de préciser ses conditions d'application. L'exception de non-subrogation est un mécanisme juridique qui date de l'époque romaine. Elle est maintenant intégrée dans presque tous les systèmes juridiques du monde, tant en droit civil qu'en common law. Dans la législation québécoise, elle s'est cristallisée à l'article 2365 C.c.Q. Il s'agit d'une disposition d'ordre public qui ne peut être invoquée que par la caution. Son application dépend du cumul de quatre conditions: 1) le fait du créancier; 2) la perte d'un droit subrogatoire; 3) le préjudice de la caution; 4) le lien causal entre les trois derniers éléments. Lorsque ces quatre conditions sont remplies, la caution est libérée de son engagement dans la mesure du préjudice qu'elle subit. / Article 2365 of the Civil Code of Quebec ("C.C.Q.") states that the creditor and the surety cannot claim rights and liberties that the text secures for or against them. To deal with this problem, the authors and authorities gave free reign to imagination in an attempt to categorize this provision within recognized legal institutions and thereby demythicize the content of the rule of law. We are of the opinion that the non-subrogation exception is in itself an original concept that arises from within its institution. We believe that the non-subrogation exception, a discharge mode which aims at fighting opportunistic behaviour, crystallises the duty of good faith by implicitly imposing upon the creditor the obligation of subrogation. The creditor's failure to comply with this obligation will result in his right to claim in respect of the surety not being receivable in court. This throws some light on the context of Article 2365 C.c.Q., defines its boundaries and clarifies its applicability. The non-subrogation exception is a legal mechanism that goes back to Roman times. ft has now been incorporated into both civil and common law in almost ail legal systems in the world. In Quebec legislation, it falls under Article 2365 C.C.Q. It is a public order provision that only the surety can cite. The enforcement of this provision is subject to the following conditions: 1) the act of the creditor; 2) the loss of a subrogatory right; 3) the surety's prejudice; 4) the causal link between the three. When these conditions are fulfilled, the surety is released from his obligation to the extent of the prejudice he has suffered.

No description available.