论文部分内容阅读
当事人双方在合同中事先约定的、旨在限制或免除其未来责任的免责条款,具有分配负担与风险的积极价值。但是,免责条款的格式化,使滥用免责条款侵害相对人尤其是消费者的合法权益现象日趋严重。法律对免责条款的规范与控制,实质是为了协调与平衡合同自由原则与禁止免责条款滥用之间的矛盾与冲突。免责条款的效力基础,源于法律对社会公共利益的维护与合同正义原则对合同自由原则的矫正。就免责条款的类型而言,包括免除侵权责任的格式条款、免除因故意或重大过失导致违约责任的格式条款以及免除对相对人不公平、不合理的格式条款,其效力基础不同,因此效力规则亦应当采取不同的标准予以判断。与先进国家或地区有关免责条款的效力规制相比,我国法释[2009]5号第9—10条存在着不足之处,应当借鉴先进国家或地区以及国际条约相关立法与判例,进一步予以完善。
The two sides in the contract agreed in advance, aims to limit or exempt from its future liability exemption clause, with the burden and risk allocation of positive value. However, the formatting of exemption clauses makes the abuse of exemption clauses infringe the lawful rights and interests of relative people, especially consumers. The regulation and control of the clauses of exemption in law are essentially in order to coordinate and balance contradictions and conflicts between the principle of freedom of contract and the prohibition of abuse of exemption clauses. The basis for the validity of the exemption clauses comes from the maintenance of social public interest by law and the rectification of the principle of freedom of contract by the principle of justice of contract. In terms of the type of the exclusion clauses, the clauses of the clauses, including the clauses that exempt from tort liability, the clauses that exempt liability for breach of contract due to intentional or gross negligence, and the exemption from the unfair and unreasonable clauses of the counterparty, Different standards should also be adopted for judgment. Compared with the regulations on the validity of the exemption clauses in advanced countries and regions, there are some shortcomings in Article 9-10 of the Fushi [2009] 5 in our country, and should be further consummated by referring to the relevant legislation and precedents of advanced countries or regions and international treaties .