Diese Arbeit behandelt das Thema "Rechtsinstitut der vorvertraglichen Haftung in Theorie und Praxis". Die ganze Arbeit ist in drei Teile gegliedert und zwar "Der Begriff der Vorvertraglichen Haftung", "Die Komparative Analyse der ausländischen Rechtsordnungen" und "Das tschechische Konzept der vorvertraglichen Haftung". Das Hauptziel dieser Arbeit ist, die praktischen Aspekte der vorvertraglichen Haftung zu beschreiben, was aber ohne ausreichende theoretische Grundlagen unmöglich ist. Die Doktrin culpa in contrahendo (Verschulden beim Vertragsabschluss) wird Rudolph von Jhering zugeschrieben, denn er hat im Jahre 1861 als erstes die charakteristischen Züge der vorvertraglichen Obligationen beschrieben. Der Autor ordnet in dem ersten Teil dieser Arbeit noch die vorvertragliche Haftung in das Rechtssystem ein. Die zum Teil von dem Autor entworfene Definition dient dann in dem zweiten und dritten Teil zu dem einfacheren Vergleich der Konzepte von vorvertraglicher Haftung in verschiedenen Rechtsordnungen. In dem zweiten Teil wird zuerst das deutsche Konzept der culpa in contrahendo beschrieben, wie es sich von R. von Jhering über die Schuldrechtsmodernisierung bis zum heutigen Tag entwickelt hat. Die Entwicklung der deutschen Auffassung der vorvertraglichen Haftung von der materiellen zur formalen...

Law / LL.M.

Formation of a contract is nowadays more sophisticated than it formerly used to be due to major progress in communication technologies and technical development, and therefore, looking on negotiation process only through the notions of offer and acceptance alone appears to be somewhat insufficient. It is not unusual and infrequent that long term and complicated dealings take place prior to the conclusion of a contract, especially in more or less complex business matters. During various negotiation stages, many parties may incur different kinds of significant expenses in order to prepare well for the next phase of the negotiations and, eventually, for the targeted contractual performance. For the conclusion of a contract it may also be necessary to inform the other party about the terms and conditions which are essential for the first party's final decision about the contract, while some of this information might be considered as strictly confidential. Although the fundamental principle of contractual freedom allows the parties to act freely in negotiations and the contractual process is generally regarded as a non-binding relationship, there are some restrictions set up with the aim to protect good faith of the parties and support their fair dealings. According to the abovementioned, a situation...

- The Principle of Fair Business Transactions The submitted thesis called The Principle of Fair Business Transactions deals with assessment of impacts of private law's recodification on this principle and the issue of its application. The thesis consists of two main parts - theoretical and analytical. The theoretical part is divided into general and specific. The general theoretical part focuses on the specification of the business principle and its emplacement among other similar private law's principles such as principle of good faith and fair dealing and good manners. The aim of this part was to define divergences of each of the principles and the aftermaths of breaking these principles. It is impossible to go through the topic of the principle of fair business transactions globally, especially due to the extensiveness and variety of usage of the principle in business law relationships. Therefore, special attention has been paid to the principle of fair business transactions in the field of contractual penalty in the next theoretical part. In the analytical part, I endeavour to deal with the issue of the exercising of the right of a contractual penalty. In the first part, there is a short discourse on the contractual penalty itself, definition of an inadequate amount of the contractual penalty...

An insurance contract is a contract of utmost good faith. The nature of the insurance bargain makes the duty a commercial necessity. Duties of disclosure and representation, which were two fundamental components of the principle of utmost good faith, operate in different ways in England and China. The insured and insurer in these two countries bears distinctive good faith related obligations pre- and post-contractually. English insurance law exercise considerable influence in most common law countries and some civil law jurisdictions. The separation between utmost good faith and the duty of fair presentation, with the abolition of the avoidance remedy, under the Insurance Act 2015 could influence other jurisdictions to alter their remedies. This thesis examines the application of the civil law notion of good faith and the common law duty of utmost good faith. It covers the operation of insured’s pre-contractual duties of disclosure and representation in both countries. The thesis considers the insurer’s duties as well as the continuing duties and the effect of utmost good faith taking in account the recent legislative changes on fraudulent claims and late payment. The thesis further examines the legal status of brokers and their disclosure duty in China and England. Finally, it also provides special considerations on consumers and micro-businesses.

Law / LL.M.

Framställan behandlar i vilken utsträckning den ena avtalspartens brott mot lojalitetsplikten medför att den andra avtalsparten får en, helt eller delvis, inskränkt lojalitetsplikt (lojalitetsreciprocitet). Då lojalitetsreciprocitet utgör en del av lojalitetsplikten är förståelsen för det senare institutet avgörande för att kunna analysera reciprociteten. Därför studeras även lojalitetspliktens innehåll och betydelse. Slutsatserna om reciprocitet grundas i stor utsträckning på avtalstyper där lojalitetsplikten är särskilt långtgående. Det medför slutsatserna störst betydelse vid en mer långtgående lojalitetsplikt. Emellertid gör slutsatserna anspråk på att vara så generella att de grunder och principer som fastställs för bedömningen har betydelse även vid en mindre långtgående lojalitetsplikt. Vidare studeras reciprociteten i förhållande till lojalitetsförpliktelser, vilka inte skiljer sig åt lika mycket mellan olika kontraktstyper. En fråga av stor vikt för lojalitetsreciprocitetens betydelseområde är om det kan anses föreligga en allmän lojalitetsplikt inom hela kontraktsrätten. Slutsatsen i den delen är att det föreligger en allmän lojalitetplikt inom varje kontraktstyp även om den är starkt varierande till sin omfattning. Det medför att lojalitetsreciprocitet får ett stort betydelseområde eftersom det då kan beaktas inom varje kontraktstyp avseende både den allmänna lojalitetsplikten och lojalitetsförpliktelserna. Föremålet för framställan, lojalitetsreciprocitet, analyseras dels utifrån förekommande lojalitetsreciprocitet inom ett antal utvalda kontraktstyper (bl.a. mellanmans-, samarbets- och företagsförsäkringsförhållanden), dels utifrån reciprocitet oberoende av kontraktstyp. Utifrån de reciprocitetsuttryck som finns i materialet fastställs generella ramar och principer för bedömningen av lojalitetsreciprocitet inom lojalitetsplikten i dess helhet. Slutsatserna visar att det finns många gemensamma överväganden och principer för bedömningen av lojalitetsreciprocitet. För det första finns det tre förutsättningar som är nödvändiga för att lojalitetsreciprocitet överhuvudtaget ska kunna föreligga: ett lojalitetsbrott, en ömsesidig lojalitetsplikt och att reciprociteten inte drabbar en tredje avtalspart. För det andra har det identifierats två förhållanden som är av störst vikt för lojalitetsreciprocitet: dels  hur allvarligt lojalitetsbrottet är, dels i vilken omfattning reciprocitet skulle riskera onödig förstöring. Det förra har i sin tur funnits primärt vara beroende av den subjektiva skulden hos parten som begår lojalitetsbrottet, om denne varit i en överordnad ställning och hur långtgående lojalitetsplikten som inte efterlevdes var.För det tredje finns ett antal andra förhållanden som påverkar reciprociteten, bland annat: om skyddshänsyn avseende lojalitetssubjektet gör sig gällande, passivitet hos reciprocitetssubjektet och om annan lojalitetsbrottsverkan inträder. / The essay seeks to determine the extent to which a breach of the obligation of good faith reducesthe corresponding obligation of the other party to the contract (reciprocity). To be able to graspthe meaning and analyze reciprocity it is necessary to understand the institute of good faith.Thus, the text firstly examines good faith in general, followed by an analysis of reciprocity withinthat institute. The paper is based on legal sources typified by strong obligation of good faith.Accordingly, the analysis primarily sheds light on areas where the obligations of good faith arefar-reaching. The general principles of reciprocity, however, are applicable across the board,regardless of how strong the obligations of good faith are. The study evaluates reciprocity inrelation to several types of contracts, but it also interprets reciprocity as a freestanding generalprinciple which is applicable to all contracts. The specific obligations of good faith undoubtedly fall within the scope of reciprocity. Arelated and important question, which needs to be addressed, is whether there is a generalobligation of good faith within all type of contracts. The subsequent answer determines theadditional scope of reciprocity. In this matter the essay concludes that the question should beanswered in the affirmative. There is a general obligation of good faith, but the strength of thatobligation varies considerably depending on the type of contract. The conclusion of the essay is that there are several general principles within reciprocity.Firstly, there are three prerequisites for reciprocity: (i) a breach of the obligation of good faith; (ii)a mutual obligation of good faith between the involved parties; and (iii) the rule that reciprocitycannot affect a third party. Secondly, the paper identifies that the following two questions are the most significantfactors in the assessment of reciprocity: how severe is the breach of good faith and to whichextent does it entail negative economic consequences? An essential aspect of the former question is whether the party responsible for the breachhad ill intent and, if so, the degree and severity of that ill intent. Another important factor iswhether the party responsible for the breach is in a superior position. Three further examples of factors relevant to the assessment are: when a vulnerable partyis responsible for the breach such circumstances can affect the possibility of reciprocity andmitigate the seriousness of the misconduct in question; occasions when the other party has failedto act (passivity); and when the responsible party suffers consequences in addition to reciprocity.

Thesis (LLM)--Stellenbosch University, 2012. / Includes bibliography / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: This thesis analyses current South African copyright law to ascertain the proper interpretation and application of the fair dealing provisions contained in the Copyright Act 98 of 1978. Copyright law ensures that authors’ works are not used without their consent, which they can grant subject to compensation or conditions attached to the use. Fair dealing exceptions allow the general public to use copyright works for certain purposes without the copyright owner’s consent and without paying compensation. These provisions are intended to balance copyright owners’ interests with the interest that members of the public have in using copyright works for socially beneficial purposes. These provisions typically allow the use of a copyright work for the purposes of research or private study, personal or private use, criticism and review, and news reporting. Unfortunately there is no South African case law concerning the fair dealing provisions, and the application of these exceptions remains unclear. This study aims to clarify the extent of application of the fair dealing exceptions to copyright infringement so that courts may be more willing to consider foreign and international law and in doing so develop South African intellectual property law. The social and economic policy considerations underlying the fair dealing exceptions are considered to determine their function. International conventions relating to copyright and neighbouring rights are examined, specifically the provisions allowing exceptions to copyright. The legislation and case law of Australia and the United Kingdom are analysed to determine the proper interpretation and application of these statutory defences. This knowledge is then used to inform South African law. The Copyright Act 98 of 1978 does not contain a fair dealing exception for parody and satire. Australian legislation does contain such an exception, and it is analysed in that context. An exception for parody is proposed for South African law, and the need for and application of this provision is considered. The constitutionality of the proposed exception is evaluated in terms of its impact on the constitutional property rights of copyright owners. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Hierdie tesis ondersoek Suid-Afrikaanse outeursreg om die behoorlike uitleg en toepassing van die “billike gebruik”-bepalings in die Wet op Outeursreg 98 van 1978 te bepaal. Outeursreg beskerm die werk van ʼn outeur teen ongemagtigde gebruik van haar intellektuele eiendom. Gebruik kan deur die outeur gemagtig word, òf teen vergoeding òf onderhewig aan bepaalde voorwaardes. Artikels 12-19B (die billike gebruik-bepalings) van die Wet op Outeursreg laat ander toe om sekere werke te gebruik sonder die toestemming van die eienaar van die werk en sonder om vergoeding te betaal. Die bepalings streef om ʼn balans te tref tussen die belange van die outeur en die belange van die publiek. ʼn Werk mag volgens hierdie bepalings tipies gebruik word vir die doeleindes van navorsing of private studie, persoonlike of private gebruik, beoordeling of resensie, of om nuus te rapporteer. Daar is tans geen Suid-Afrikaanse regspraak rakende hierdie uitsonderings nie, en hul toepassing is dus onseker. Hierdie tesis beoog om die werking van die billike gebruik-bepalings duidelik uiteen te sit om hoër gewilligheid in howe te skep om internasionale en buitelandse reg toe te pas, en sodoende Suid-Afrikaanse immateriële goederereg te ontwikkel. Die sosiale en ekonomiese beleidsoorwegings wat die bepalings ondersteun word geanaliseer om die doel daarvan te bepaal. Internasionale outeursreg-verdragte word bespreek om ʼn raamwerk vir die uitsonderings te skep. Wetgewing en regspraak van Australië en die Verenigde Koninkryk word ondersoek, en die kennis wat daar opgedoen word, word toegepas op die Suid-Afrikaanse bepalings. Die Wet op Outeursreg 98 van 1978 bevat geen uitsondering vir die doeleindes van parodie en satire nie. Die Australiese Wet op Outeursreg 63 van 1968 bevat wel so ʼn uitsondering, en dit word in hierdie verband beoordeel. ʼn Uitsondering vir parodie en satire word voorgestel en oorweeg in die konteks van Suid-Afrikaanse outeursreg. Die grondwetlikheid van die voorgestelde uitsondering word bepaal na aanleiding van die impak wat dit sal hê op outeurs se eiendomsreg.

The thesis deals with questions of pre-contractual liability which is seen as a very specific institute whose conception is diverse in different EU countries and also outside. The main research question is a difference between pre-contractual liability perception in the different countries and its full description in relation to the negotiations of business contracts with an emphasis on Czech law. In the first part, the author analyses historical background of pre-contractual liability in relation to Roman law and German-Austrian legal systems in which the professor Jhering developed that construction of culpa in contrahendo. In the following chapters, the author deals with the description and nature of pre-contractual liability, particularly in questions of whether they are contractual or delictual liability and enter into details the basic facts, example and extent of damages with respect to the European concept of pre-contractual liability. He concludes that the pre-contractual liability is in the European concept as delictual liability, with regard to the decision of European Court of Justice. The author simultaneously mentions that although similar facts in the legal systems, the extent of damages is very different when there is a clear dichotomy between positive and negative interesse. The...

Jusqu'à l'arrêt CCH Canadienne Ltée c Barreau du Haut-Canada, rendu par la Cour suprême en 2004, la doctrine canadienne opposait deux exceptions générales au droit d’auteur : l'utilisation équitable (fair dealing), existant surtout dans les pays du Commonwealth (dont le Canada), et l’usage loyal (fair use), exception présente aux États-Unis. Alors que le premier modèle serait restrictif et conservateur, le second se voudrait plus libéral et soucieux des droits des utilisateurs. Il va sans dire que certains auteurs contestaient le statu quo juridique et souhaitaient plutôt l'adoption d'une approche libérale, voire étatsunienne, en matière d'utilisation équitable au Canada. Or, depuis l'arrêt CCH et la pentalogie du droit d’auteur de 2012, un important changement conceptuel de cette dichotomie s’est opéré. Certains auteurs décrivent une réduction significative des différences entre les deux approches, rendant les distinctions futiles. Ainsi, nous sommes amenés à nous poser la question suivante : suite à la jurisprudence canadienne contemporaine, existe-t-il toujours une différence significative entre l'utilisation équitable et l’usage loyal ? Ce mémoire se veut une analyse de l’état du droit en 2019 afin de répondre à cette question. Au terme de son raisonnement, l’auteur arrive à la conclusion que même si les deux régimes se ressemblent plus que jamais, les différences entre ceux-ci sont suffisamment importantes pour ne pas les assimiler à une unique approche avec des variations mineures. / Until the Supreme Court of Canada decision CCH Canadian Ltd v Law Society of Upper Canada in 2004, the legal literature in Canada acknowledged two competing general exceptions to copyright: fair dealing, which exists especially in Commonwealth countries (including Canada), and fair use, an exception in the United States. While the former was seen as restrictive and conservative, the second was viewed as intending to be liberal and more concerned with user rights. Needless to say, some writers contested the legal status quo and wanted a liberal, even American, approach to fair dealing in Canada. However, since the CCH decision and the copyright pentalogy of 2012, there has been a significant conceptual shift with regard to this dichotomy. Some authors describe a significant reduction in the differences between the two approaches, making the distinctions of little consequence. As such, we are led to ask the following question: given the contemporary Canadian jurisprudence, is there still a significant difference between fair dealing and fair use? This dissertation is an analysis of the state of the law in 2019 for the purpose of answering this question. At the end of his examination of the issue, the author comes to the conclusion that even if the two regimes are more similar than ever, the differences between them are sufficiently important to not assimilate them into a single approach with minor variations.