默示在变更合同中的适用

Application of Implied Conduct in Contract Modification

默示行为是否构成意思表示需要进行解释,并且基于默示行为的表意间接性和特殊表示方式,应当采规范性解释的思路。推断解释出的默示意思表示可以适用于合同变更,不与合同变更禁止推定规则相冲突。在具体适用上,默示变更在继续性合同中更为常见,租赁合同中,双方在合同期限届满后仍然履行合同的义务将被认定为合同期限的变更,而劳动合同中,因为用人单位调岗调薪的用工自主权和较高的合同变更频率,默示变更在此发挥重要作用。对于一时性合同,法院对默示变更合同的认定却极为谨慎,不仅要求明确的意思表示,在一些对权利人影响较大的事项如放弃权利时,甚至要求明示的意思表示。

It needs interpretation as to whether or not the implied conduct constitutes an expression of intention. Based on the indirectness and special expression of the implied conduct, the normative interpretation approach shall be adopted. Inferred expression of intention may be applied to the modification of a contract, which is not conflict with the rule of presumption against modification prohibition. In terms of specific application, implied modifications are more common in continuing contracts. For example, in a lease agreement, the performance of the contractual obligations by both parties upon the expiration of the contract term shall be deemed as an amendment of the contract term. However, in an employment contract, an employer has the autonomy to adjust the position and salary and the frequency of amendments to the contract is higher. However, for temporary contracts, the courts are extremely cautious in identifying the implied modification of the contract. They not only require the explicit declaration of intent, but even the express declaration of intent in the cases which have great impact on the right holder, for example, the waiver.