论文部分内容阅读
文章以咨询责任为线索,讨论了德国法上“对第三人具有保护效力的合同”制度和信赖责任制度的发展与演变。文章认为,合同法、侵权法与缔约过失责任都可以在一定程度上对专家的咨询责任进行调整。不过三种制度各有优劣。“对第三人具有保护效力的合同”制度在第三人与合同一方当事人具有亲属、劳动关系等特定联系时,在逻辑上、法理上是合适的。2002年的债法修改中制定的第311条第3款在一定程度上肯定了信赖责任理论,该条是处理某些类型的咨询责任的新依据。该规定可以在很大程度上减轻“对第三人具有保护效力的合同”制度的压力。侵权法是咨询提供人和受咨询人之间没有合同关系或特定联系时,受咨询人所能获得的惟一的救济方式。
The article takes the consulting responsibility as a clue to discuss the development and evolution of the German law “the contract with the protection of the third party” and the responsibility system of trust. The article believes that the contract law, tort law and contracting fault liability can to some extent to adjust the consulting responsibility of experts. However, the three systems have their own advantages and disadvantages. “Contract for the Protection of the Third Party” The system is logically and legally justified when the third party has certain relations with relatives and labor relations. Article 311, paragraph 3, developed in the 2002 revision of the law on debt, affirms to some extent the theory of liability, which is a new basis for dealing with certain types of advisory responsibilities. This provision can largely relieve the pressure on the “contract to protect the third party” system. Tort law is the only remedy available to consultants for whom there is no contractual relationship or specific connection between the consultant and the consultant.