تاملی در مفهوم نسبیت تقصیر در قراردادها با مطالعه تطبیقی در حقوق انگلستان و فرانسه

نوع مقاله : علمی پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشیار گروه حقوق، دانشکده علوم اداری و اقتصاد، دانشگاه اصفهان، اصفهان، ایران.

2 دکتری حقوق خصوصی، دانشکده علوم اداری و اقتصاد، دانشگاه اصفهان، اصفهان، ایران.

چکیده

اصل «اثر نسبی قرارداد» (Le principe de l'effet relatif du contrat) یا اصل «نسبیت قراردادها» (La relativité des conventions) اصلی معروف در حقوق تعهدات بوده که در همه نظام های حقوقی، اصلی شناخته شده است. بر مبنای این اصل، تعهدات قرارداد بر ذمه طرفین عقد بوده و منافع نیز متعلق به طرفین است و تعهدی برای اشخاص ثالث ایجاد نمی کند. همچنان که اشخاص ثالث نمی توانند انتظار سودی از قرارداد داشته باشند. اما اصل نسبیت تقصیر از حیث تاثیر نقض تعهد قراردادی بر حقوق اشخاص ثالث گویا اصلی خلاف این جهت است که این سوال قابل طرح است، اگر در قراردادی، تعهدات نقض شود و به شخص یا اشخاص ثالث خسارتی وارد آید، آیا این نقض پیمان از سوی طرفین قرارداد به عنوان یک تقصیر قابل استناد است؟ در حقوق فرانسه بحث نسبیت تقصیر قراردادی مطرح شده و در حقوق انگلستان بررسی برخی از آراء، نشان دهنده تمایل این نظام حقوقی به طرح این مساله است که در این مقاله با مطالعه تطبیقی در حقوق ایران طرح می شود. به نظر می رسد تقصیر قراردادی، مفهومی نسبی دارد و به‌رغم اصل نسبیت قرارداد، این مزیت برای ثالث وجود دارد که به نقض تعهد قراردادی برای مطالبه خسارت استناد کند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

A Reflection on the Concept of Privity of Fault in Contracts with a Comparative Study in English and French law

نویسندگان [English]

  • Alireza Yazdanian 1
  • Noora Ehsangar 2
1 Associate Professor of private law at Faculty of Administrative Sciences and Economics, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran
2 Ph.D. in private law, Faculty of Administrative Sciences and Economics, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran.
چکیده [English]

The principle of "the effect of privity of contract " or the principle of "privity of contracts " is a well-known principle in the law of obligations, which is recognized as the principle in all Legal systems. Based on this principle, the obligations of the contract are liabilities of the parties of the contract, and the benefits belong to the parties, and it does not create obligations for third parties as third parties cannot expect profit from the contract. But the principle of the privity of fault in terms of the possibility of a third party citing the violation of the contractual obligation seems to be against the principle of privity of contracts, and this question can be raised If in a contract, obligations are violated and damage is caused to a third party or parties, can this violation of the contract by the parties of the contract be cited as a fault? In French law, the discussion of the privity of contractual fault is raised, and in English law, the examination of some opinions shows the tendency of this legal system to raise this issue, which is raised in this article with a comparative study of Iranian law. It seems that contractual fault has a relative concept and despite the principle of privity of contract, there is an advantage for the third party to rely on breach of contractual obligation to claim damages.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Contract
  • Obligation
  • privity of fault
  • Third party
  • Liability
Adel, Mustafa, (1385), Civil Law, Qazvin: Taha Publications. [In Persian]
 
Amiri Qaim Maqam, Abdul Majid (2016) Laws of Obligations, Tehran: Mizan Publishing. [In Persian]
 
Babaei, Iraj, (1381), Investigate civil rights element error responsibility in Iran, Public Law Research Quarterly, Vol. 4, pp. 49-91. [In Persian]
 
Badini, Hassan; Arab Asadi, Taha; Ghafari, Amir, (1402), A Critical Appraisal of Effects of Different Levels of Negligence on Liability of Tortfeasors Under Iranian Law: A comparative Study, Journal of Legal Studies, Vol.15, pp. 167-200. [In Persian]
Badini, Hassan; Sarfi, Majid, (2017), The Consideration of Possibility of Third Party’s invocation To professional Contractual Commitments in the Civil Liability Dispute, Comparative Law Review, Vol. 9, pp. 25-46. [In Persian]
 
Benabant , Alain(2016) Droit civil ,Les obligations, 15.é.éd, Librairie général de droit et de jurisprudence, Montchrestien.
 
Bermingham, V., Hodgson, J. & Watson, S. (2014). Nutshells: Tort. Sweet & Maxwell.
 
Birks, P., (2000), Rights, wrongs, and remedies, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 20(1), pp. 1-37.
 
Burrows, A. (2016). A restatement of the English Law of Contract. Oxford University Press.
 
Bussani, M., Palmer, V. V., & Parisi, F., (2003), Liability for pure financial loss in Europe: An economic restatement. Am. J. Comp. L., 51, 113.
 
Cabrillac, R. (2016). Droit des obligations. 12é.éd. Dalloz.
 
Colin, A. (1935). Cours élémentaire de droit civil français (Vol. 2).8é. éd. Paris. Librarie Dalloz.
 
Deakin, S., & Markesinis, B. (2019). Markesinis and Deakin's tort law. Oxford University Press.
 
Du Chambon, P. M. (2014). Régime de la réparation: action en réparation. . Les modes de preuve". JurisClasseur Responsabilité civile et Assurances. Fasc. 223.
 
Gergen, M. P., (2006), the ambit of negligence liability for pure economic loss, Ariz. L. Rev., 48, 749.
 
Harpwood, V. H. (2009). Modern Tort Law. 7thed. Routledge.
 
Hashemi, Seyyed Ahmed Ali, (2009), Domain of civil responsibility, Tehran. Imam Sadiq University. [In Persian]
 
Hodges, C. J. (Ed.). (1993). Product liability: European laws and practice. Sweet & Maxwell UK.
 
Jafari Langroudi, Mohammad Jaafar, (1388), Encyclopaedia of Civil and Business Laws: Laws of Obligations and Contracts, Tehran: Ganj Danesh. [In Persian]
 
Jourdain, P. (2001). Relativité de la faute délictuelle: la complicité d'adultère n'est pas à elle seule une faute à l'égard de l'époux trompé. Revue trimestrielle de droit civil, 893.
 
Jourdain, P. (2011). DROIT À RÉPARATION, Responsabilité fondée sur la faute, Notion de faute: contenu commun à toutes les fautes.
 
JurisClasseur Responsabilité civile et Assurances, Fasc 120, 10.
 
Jourdain, P. (2011). DROIT À RÉPARATION, Responsabilité fondée sur la faute, Notion de faute: contenu commun à toutes les fautes.
 
JurisClasseur Responsabilité civile et Assurances, Fasc 120, 10.
 
Katouzian, Nasser, (2014), Civil Law, General Rules of Contracts, Tehran: Publishing Company. [In Persian]
 
Katouzian, Nasser, (2018), Introductory course of civil law: legal application of contract-performance, Tehran: Publishing Company. [In Persian]
 
Le Tourneau, P., Cadiet, L. (1998). Droit de la responsabilité. 1é.éd.Dalloz.
 
Malaurie, P., Aynès, L., & Stoffel-Munck, P. (2016). Droit civil,  Les obligations, 8 é.éd, Editions juridiques associées,Défrenois.
 
Peel, E. & Treitel, G. H. (2015). The law of contract. London: Sweet & Maxwell.
 
Peel, Edwin. (2020). the Law of Contract: 15thed. Sweet & Maxwell.
 
 Pellierle(Jean-Denis). (2023). L’identité des fautes contractuelle et délictuelle: la Cour de cassation persiste et signe. Dalloz.
 
Qasim-zadeh, Syed Morteza, (2015), Civil law-obligations and civil liability non-contractual, Tehran: Mizan publication. [In Persian]
 
Safai, Seyyed Hossein; Rahimi, Habibullah, (2018), Civil liability (Non-Contractual Obligations), Tehran: Samit Publications. [In Persian]
 
Safai, Seyyed Hossein; Rahimi, Habibullah, (2018), Comparative Civil Liability, Tehran: Shahr Danesh Institute of Legal Studies and Research. [In Persian]
Saint-Pau, Jean-Christophe(2013). DROIT à REPARATION  Conditions de la responsabilité contractuelle  Fait générateur  Inexécution imputable au débiteur, JurisClasseur Responsabilité civile et Assurances.
 
Shahidi, Mehdi, (2018), Civil law: effects of contracts and obligations, Tehran: Majd Publications. [In Persian]
 
Stephenson, G. (2000). Sourcebook on Tort Law 2/e. Cavendish Publishing.
 
Stone, R. & Devenney, J. (2017). The modern law of contract. Routledge.
 
Treitel, G. H. (1984). An outline of the law of contract.
 
Treitel, G. H. (2003). The Law of Contract: 11thed. Thomson Sweet & Maxwell, London.
 
Van Boom, W. H. (2004). Pure Economic Loss-A Comparative Perspective.
 
Wacks, R. (2015). Law: A very short introduction (Vol. 180). Oxford University Press.
 
Yazdanian, Alireza, (2016), Civil law, law of obligations, general rules of civil liability with a comparative study in French law, Tehran: Mizan Publishing. [In Persian]
 
Yazdanian, Alireza, (2018), Concept and effects of notice for performance (Mise en demeure) in law of obligations with Comparative Study in French Law, Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 11, pp. 207-242. [In Persian]
 
Zafari, Majdeh; Shahbazi Nia, Morteza; Abdali, Mehrzad; Sharifi, Seyyed Elhamuddin, (1402), Analysis of Conditionality or Preventiveness of Fault in Iranian and American contractual liability, Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 15, pp. 201-228. [In Persian]
دوره 8، شماره 1 - شماره پیاپی 13
در حال صفحه آرایی و بارگزاری فایل اصل مقالات
فروردین 1403
  • تاریخ دریافت: 03 تیر 1402
  • تاریخ بازنگری: 31 تیر 1402
  • تاریخ پذیرش: 19 مرداد 1402