摘要
我国《合同法》第19条所作"要约不得撤销"的规定直接抄用于《联合国国际货物销售合同公约》(CIGS)第16条第2款。从立法史看,《联合国国际货物绡售合同公约》第16条第2款是折中德国法模式与普通法模式的结果。不同国家的学者在解释该款规定时,虽然尽可能地考虑了法律适用的统一性,但因该规定自身含混不清,他们的意见明显存在分歧。作为一种国内法规则,《合同法》第19条根本不存在调和不同法系规则的内在约束,因此,不可像不同法系学者理解公约的规定的那些方式进行解释。这决定了不应以融通不同规范模式而应明确以德国法模式作为解释第19条规定的出发点。具体来讲,应以限制要约撤销为立场,将第19条从宽解释为规定了三种限制撤销权的事由。根据其设立目的并权衡缔约双方当事人的利益关系,应将"要约不得撤销"的规范意义解释为,并非意味着违法撤销要约须负信赖损失赔偿责任,而是指撤销要约的通知不发生效力,受要约人的承诺通知只要适时到达了要约人,合同即可成立。
Article 19 of Contract Law of the People' s Republic of China (CLC) is taken literally from article 16(2) of United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG). From the perspective of legislative history, article 16(2) of CISG is in fact the result of compromise of German law pattern and common law model. When interpreting article 16(2) of CISG, due to the vagueness of the article itself, there exists divergence of views among scholars from different legal systems, though they have seriously taken into account the uniformity of the application of CISG. Article 19 of CLC, being a rule provided in national law, is not inher- ently restrained because it has no need to accomm Namely, article 19 of CLC should not be interpreted ate rules set forth in different legal systems. in the way as scholars from different legal sys- terns understand article 16(2) of CISG. This shows that our starting point should be to adopt Ger- man law pattern as the basis to interpret article 19 rather than taking the approach of accommodat- ing different models of norms. Concretely speaking, in Chinese civil law, revocation of an offer should be restricted, and article 19 should be interpreted broadly to include three causes in terms of restriction of right of revocation. According to legislative purpose and the necessity of balancing interests between contracting parties, the normative meaning of the provision "an offer may not be revoked" should be interpreted as follows. The notice of revocation shall not take effect, and a contract is concluded so long as the notice of acceptance by an offeree reaches an offeror in a rea- sonable time.
出处
《环球法律评论》
CSSCI
北大核心
2012年第5期93-106,共14页
Global Law Review