Search

Copyright of Datenschutz und Datensicherheit - DuD is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

I. INTRODUCTION II. BREACH IN FRENCH LAW A. Evolution of French Contract Law B. Obligation de Resultat and Obligation de Moyens C. Consequences of a Failed Performance D. Concept of [...], The comparative analysis of law has been used to flesh out the commonalities and divergences between different legal systems, legal families, and bodies of law. Legal systems are often grouped or categorized as parts of a given legal tradition. A popular division in legal traditions has been that of the civil versus common law traditions. But such a taxonomy is a bit simplistic since there are numerous and important differences across legal traditions. Most civil law countries can be divided into those of the Germanic and Franco-Romanistic families, whereas Anglo-American law suggests a more holistic view of the common law. In reality, there are significant differences between the English and American common laws of contracts. These differences have become more profound with the modernization of commercial law through the enactment of the American Uniform Commercial Code and its subsequent influence on the development of the American common law of contracts. Comparative contract law has been a longstanding subject of comparative law scholars. This Article continues that line of comparative law research by exploring the mostly unstudied area of the meaning of breach in breach of contract, and its consequences. The Authors come from different parts of the civil-common law divide and the intra-family divide within the civil law tradition, accompanied by a knowledge of the unique civil law system instituted in the People's Republic of China. Finally, since all five countries subject to this study have adopted the Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG), a discussion of how these countries have applied the CISG's fundamental breach rule is undertaken.

We live in societies in which an ever-growing array of activities in a range of fields are assessed, controlled and governed according to quantitative techniques. This paper focuses on processes grounded on quantitative tools (e.g. scores, indicators, rankings, algorithms) that are used in order to measure the performance of processes, people or organizations. Such processes are referred to in this paper as 'legal metrics'. We explore how different legal systems and sectors rely on legal metrics, and develop a twofold argument. On the one hand, we argue that performance-based quantification often qualifies as a form of regulatory intervention. On the other hand, we contend that performance-based measures are always adopted and applied in legal contexts that react differently to the quantification turn. Both sides of this picture have largely been overlooked by comparative lawyers, even though they imply looking for law in extraordinary places and appraising a variety of legal manifestations in different settings. Understanding which forms of quantitative measures are widespread, in which sectors and regions, made by whom and producing what regulatory effects, is a research task that could (and in our opinion should) be of interest for all comparative law scholars. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A major unresolved issue in international business transactions relates to the enforceability of preliminary agreements. Preliminary agreements cover a long list of instruments commonly used in most sectors of the economy. The common presumption is that these agreements are not enforceable. The correct answer is much more nuanced. For example, a preliminary agreement may be held to be unenforceable but at the same time be the basis for legal liability. There are strong differences between the civil and common laws on the issues of good faith negotiations and the enforceability of preliminary agreements, but there is also sustained uncertainty within legal systems. This article reviews Chinese, French, German, and Anglo-American law on the twin issues of enforceability and liability. It shows that the trend has been in favor of greater judicial scrutiny of such agreements that has led to greater enforceability and the expansion of available remedies, whether an agreement is deemed to be enforceable or unenforceable. The issue of preliminary agreements and their place in the overall legal scheme has become less clear as courts have recognized their necessity as modern contract transactions have become more long-term and complex. The countries selected for review provide a three-part taxonomy. First, preliminary agreements are unenforceable due to the lack of certainty of terms and party intent. Second, preliminary agreements that are detailed may be recognized as enforceable contracts. Third, there is a broad middle area in which preliminary agreements are unenforceable as a whole but can be the basis for liability for independent obligations found in the agreements. These independent obligations include an implied-in-law or an implied-in-fact obligation to negotiate in good faith. duty of confidentiality, and duty of exclusivity to not negotiate with other parties. It is in this middle area where there has been a convergence in legal systems and, at the same time, where the issues of liability and remedies have become more uncertain. Because of the ubiquity of these agreements. the possibility of unexpected liability remains pronounced in international business negotiations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]