检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:朱颖俐[1]
出 处:《河北法学》2004年第1期149-152,共4页Hebei Law Science
基 金:国家社会科学规划基金项目(98JAQ820019)
摘 要:各国确认要约生效时间的不同是世界各国关于要约生效制度差异的主要表现之一。我国合同法论著中通常认为在要约生效时间的规定方面,"大陆法系和英美法系都采用到达主义"。通过比较各国关于要约生效时间方面的法律规定和司法实践,认为作为大陆法系典型代表的法国对要约的生效时间不是采用到达主义,而英美法系国家通常是以受要约人作出承诺的时间作为要约的生效时间,故认为"大陆法系和英美法系都采用到达主义"的观点是错误的。The differences of time when offer become effective is one of the representations of the differences of institution on offer becoming effective of each country. There is a popular view in the works of contract law in our country, about the time when offer become effective in other countries, both the civil law system and the common law system all adopt the principle of receipt. This article compares and analyzes the legislation of other countries, and points out that the view is defective. The reasons of the article issues are that, France, the typical representative country of the civil law system, does not adopt the principle of receipt; and the countries of the common law system take the time when the offeree sends the acceptance as the time when the offer become effective in common.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.222