Spelling suggestions: "subject:"disclosed principal"" "subject:"disclose principal""
1 |
Die regsaard van die kontraktuele verhouding tussen produsente en kooperasies betreffende die verpoeling van produkteTaljaard, Jochemus Cornelius 04 1900 (has links)
Dissertation (LLM )--Stellenbosch University, 2002. / Copy not signed by author. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The use of co-operative pools in the South African Agricultural sector is a
common phenomenon and an accepted commercial practice. Although it has
seldom been at issue, the pool relationship between producers and the cooperative
undoubtedly has certain legal consequences for the respective parties.
Our courts have never addressed the aforementioned legal consequences
authoritatively, probably because until now no disputes have arisen which could
not be settled through negotiation between the parties concerned.
Recently die legal nature of the pool relationship has became more of an issue
primarily because of queries issued by the South African Revenue Service
regarding the treatment of co-operative pools for purposes of income tax.
Although this study is not aimed at addressing the income tax issues as regards
the pool relationship, determining the legal nature of the pool relationship will be
decisive for determining how co-operative pools should be treated for tax
purposes. In addition to tax-related consequences, the legal nature of the pool
relationship will necessarily also be decisive for issues such as insolvency and
breach of contract.
In this study the courts' approach to the classification of new types of contracts
will be examined in order arrive at an underlying principle for evaluating the
contractual nature of the pool relationship.
After completion of the aforementioned examination, the functional
characteristics of the pool relationship will be outlined and the implications
thereof in respect of the law of things determined.
The next stage involves the comparison of the functional characteristics of the
pool relationship with the essential features of certain types of contracts to determine whether the pool relationship may be classified as one of these types
of contract.
From the aforementioned investigation it seems that the pool relationship does
not satisfy the essential requirements of a contract of partnership, representation,
the 'undisclosed principal' situation or mandate.
The manner in which new types of contracts are classified in South African law
is then revisited and proposals are made as to a possible methodology for
classifying contracts that, in terms of the classical approach to the classification
of contracts, would have been typified as sui generis. In accordance with this
proposed approach to the classification of contracts, the conclusion is reached
that the pool relationship is a new contract type that amalgamates elements of a
contract of partnership, mandate and locatio conductio operis. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die gebruik van koëperatiewe poele in die Suid-Afrikaanse landbou kom
algemeen voor en is In aanvaarde kommersiële praktyk. Alhoewel dit al selde op
die spits gedryf is, het die poelverhouding tussen die onderskeie produsente en
die koëperasie ongetwyfeld regsgevolge vir die onderskeie partye.
Voorgemelde regsgevolge is nog nooit deur In Suid-Afrikaanse hof aangespreek
nie, waarskynlik omdat daar nog nie enige dispute was betreffende die die
poelverhouding wat nie deur dialoog bygelê kon word nie.
In die onlangse verlede het die regsaard van die poelverhouding egter meer
relevant geword hoofsaaklik weens navrae van die Suid-Afrikaanse
Inkomstediens betreffende die belastinghantering van kooperatiewe poele.
Alhoewel hierdie verhandeling nie daarop gerig is om die belastinggevolge van
die poelverhouding aan te spreek nie, sal die bepaling van die regsaard van die
poelverhouding bepalend wees vir die hantering van die poelverhouding vir
doeleindes van belasting. Afgesien van belastinggevolge sal die regsaard van
die poelverhouding ook uiteraard bepalend wees betreffende kwessies soos
insolvensie en kontrakbreuk.
In hierdie studie sal die howe se benadering tot die klassifikasie van nuwe
kontraksoorte ondersoek word ten einde In grondslag te lê waarvolgens die
kontraktuele aard van die poelverhouding beoordeel kan word.
Na voorgemelde ondersoek word die funksionele kenmerke van die
poelverhouding uiteengesit en die sakeregtelike implikasies daarvan bepaal.
Die funksionele kenmerke van die poelverhouding word daarna opgeweeg teen
die wesenskenmerke van 'n aantal kontraksoorte ten einde vas te stelof die
poelverhouding as sodanig geklassifiseer kan word.
Uit hierdie ondersoek blyk dit dat die poelverhouding nie aan die
wesenskenmerke van die vennootskapsverhouding, verteenwoordiging, die
'undisclosed principal' situasie of 'n lasgewingsverhouding voldoen nie.
Die wyse waarop nuwe kontraktsoorte in die Suid-Afrikaanse reg hanteer word,
word daarna weer oorweeg en voorstelle aan die hand gedoen waarop kontrakte
wat, ingevolge die klassieke benadering tot die uitleg van kontrakte, as sui
generis klassifiseer word, hanteer kan word. In ooreenstemming met hierdie
voorgestelde metode van klassifikasie word daar dan tot die gevolgtrekking
gekom dat die poelverhouding 'n mengvorm tussen 'n vennootskap, 'n
lasgewingooreenkoms en 'n werkaanbestedingsooreenkoms is.
|
2 |
間接代理之研究林于人, Lin ,yu-jen Unknown Date (has links)
在現代分工的經濟社會,從事交易活動,事必躬親,殆不可能,假手他人,實有必要 。不僅如此,即使在傳統農業社會,倘若本人力有未逮,即有由他人代為處理事務之需要,易言之,藉此第三人的協助完成本人事務之情況,實屬無可避免。由此亦可得知,此種假第三人之手而完成本人事務的情形,應屬人類經營社會及經濟生活所必須,換言之,前揭情形,確屬已存在良久之社會事實,且具有社會經濟上之功能。然而,無可否認的,因為第三人的加入,使得原本單純的雙方關係,轉變成複雜的三角關係。究竟第三人之行為,對於原本之雙方當事人間以及對於第三人自身而言,究竟產生何種法律效果,也成為複雜難解的三角習題。為了妥適調和三角關係,作為社會生活規範之法律,自不能置身事外,而在私法自治原則及自己責任原則之範疇下,亦創設出數種歸屬規範 ,將前揭情形區分為各種類型而賦予本人對於第三人行為負責的效力,使第三人努力之成果得以歸由本人享有,並使本人為第三人之行為負責。
民法上的代理制度即係在規範此種三方關係的制度之一,透過民法代理之規定,在符合要件之情形下,使代理人代理本人所為行為之效果歸屬於本人。民法之規定,固然使符合代理規定之事件有法可循,但是,民法之代理制度係以直接代理 之情形為規範對象,而此種於民國18年民法制訂時同時訂定的直接代理制度,在當時仍屬傳統農業社會之時空環境下,對於處理斯時發生之案例,固然能夠游刃有餘,或能符合當事人間之利益狀態,甚至其立法衡量或許能夠符合當代的時代背景。而在經過七十餘年後的今日,我國社會從傳統農業社會轉變為工商業社會後,呈現出截然不同的社會風貌,民法的立法者是否能夠在七十年前立法之際即預見如此鉅變,實非不容置疑。申論之,在大量使用代理人或第三人代本人處理事務之工商業社會裡,現行民法以直接代理為主的代理制度是否仍然能夠符合時代的需求?商業代理是否應與民法代理為不同的處理?因而須擴大代理制度在商業上之適用,甚至將間接代理制度納入商業代理之中?尤其,我國作為一個高度依賴國際貿易的海島型國家,在講求速度及效率的競爭環境中,如果仍然侷限在現行民法代理規定設置的窠臼裡,是否能夠承擔時代考驗,亦為我國現行代理法所需面臨的問題。曾世雄也指出,民法對於間接代理並未專設條文投注,學說對於間接代理亦多忽視,可是在實際社會生活中,尤其商業活動領域,間接代理甚為重要,所扮演角色與日俱重,民法規定、學說所重與社會生活間可見有所脫節 。
抑有進者,國際間自1930年起即開始著手進行代理法統一之工作,陸續制定出1961年統一代理法草案、1961年統一行紀法草案、1983年國際商品買賣代理商公約、1996年歐洲契約法原則及2004年國際商事契約原則等國際規範,對於代理制度均有另類的詮釋,其中更有將間接代理承認為代理之一環者,上開國際趨勢著實道出了代理概念的變遷,而我國作為高度依賴國際貿易的海島型國家,本難自外於全球化的潮流,且因為跨國經濟導致國家之間的藩籬亦日益傾圮,在這無國界的時代裡,我國的法律能否與國際接軌,抑或有檢討改進之處,亦須藉著與他國法律或國際公約分析比較,呈現出我國代理法的差異之處後,再予以檢討改進,進而能夠符合世界潮流及現今趨勢。有鑑於此,在商事領域活躍的間接代理制度或相類似之制度,是否能夠因應時代需求而在台灣法律體系中重新定位,呈現出新的風貌,並能夠納入前揭歸屬規範的體系架構中?即需予以探討。
具體而言,我國民法的代理僅指直接代理已如前述,間接代理於我國法則非代理,在採取代理人行為說理論下,我國法僅承認直接代理人以本人名義代本人所為之法律行為,依據法律規定將效力歸屬於本人,反之,以代理人自己名義進行交易的間接代理即非民法上的代理,因此無法依據法律產生此種效力。因此,相較於英美法系的代理包括顯名本人(disclosed principal)、部分公開本人(partially disclosed principal)及不公開之本人(undisclosed principal)等類型,日本商法更在第504條規定了隱名代理,足見我國民法代理的範圍似乎較為狹窄。然而,即使在顯名原則的限制之下,最高法院仍然寬認在「相對人明知或可得而知代理人有代理意思」等情形下,構成所謂「隱名代理」,並認為產生將代理人所為意思表示之效果歸屬於本人之效力 ,換言之,最高法院表示隱名代理相同或類似於民法的直接代理,而應賦予相同之法律效果,就此而論,應與探求的是,隱名代理與民法直接代理間之關係為何?最高法院是否也認為隱名代理並非直接代理?是否亦承認民法規定的代理範圍較為狹窄,從而藉著透過法律解釋或類推適用承認了隱名代理?如果答案是肯定的話,民法規定之代理何以在實務運作上產生問題,即有檢討之必要。
綜上所述,本文不禁要藉著與外國立法例及國際規範的比較,以及對於歸屬規範的觀察,尋找間接代理制度在我國代理法或是歸屬規範體系中是否有容身之處,探討間接代理中當事人的風險分配及利害關係,以及在外國立法中,本人及第三人突破契約相對性原則,跨過間接代理人,直接向對方主張契約上權利之規定,是否符合公平正義及效率的要求?更進一步,回歸我國實定法,探討上列問題對於我國法律體系可能造成的衝擊及尋找我國法制能否走向新的旅程。
|
Page generated in 0.0669 seconds