Contract Law Fundamentals

Extract

[...] - On emphasizes here that the contract cannot prevail over public order. BUT THEinconvenienceThe inconvenience is that public order remains a somewhat elusive notion, and public order of protection aims to protect one of the parties, one of the interests of individuals. - The inequality between the contracting parties, and therefore the possible negationcessitIt aims to restore equality, aims to protect the weaker party. Freedom of contract cannot therefore be unlimited, as it can be dangerous. [...]

[...] It is, in a way, making effective the wish of the people who have committed themselves, and it is also reassuring the person expressing their will. This is imperative for legal security What would be the interest of a contract that could not be respected? The relevance of contract law rests on this binding force > This principle of binding force is important, but it is limited to the contracting parties only, based on Article 1103 of the CC, which states that the contract has value only between the co-contractants. [...]

[...] > Contract under seal (for example below 1500?) : - 2nd paragraph defines it as 'that whose validity is subject to forms determined by law, which requires specific materialities.' - This second paragraph states that this form is useful for the validity of the act, not just for the proof of the act - When a written document is required beyond 1500?, if the'if we do not have this written document, the act is still valid, we can just not prove it = ad probationem - But here, itit is about'a form of validity, that is to say d'a form required for the validity of the act (so below 1500?) > Real contract (delivery of a thing) : - 3rd paragraph 'appears when its formation is subject to the delivery of a thing' - Ex : contract of loan for use : it does not'and there is an obligation that if the lender has delivered the thing Promise to lend a boat for vacation We can only obtain damages and interest, we cannot force someone to exercise the contract So the borrower does not have to bear the burden in case of loss of the thing Section II - Bilateral or Unilateral Contracts > This is a very old distinction aimed at article 1106 of the civil code > Bilateral Contract (Reciprocal) : - The first paragraph defines bilateral contracts 'The contracting parties obligate each other reciprocally' = Reciprocity - In a bilateral contract, each party is both creditor and debtor - There is necessarily an interdependence between the obligations of one and the other (the obligation of one is explained by the obligation of the other and vice versa) - Allows for the justification of the exception of non-performance (because my co-contractant refuses to perform, I will not perform either) Before the 2016 reform, this notion was explained from the notion of cause the cause is the object of the obligation of the other party Today, this notion no longer exists in the civil code but it still exists from a theoretical point of view (in fact, it's just that the other European legislations did not know this notion?) > Unilateral Contract : - 2nd paragraph defines the contract 'when a person obliges themselves towards one or more people without there being a reciprocal commitment from them' - e.g. cautionnement (caution) - It does not'It is therefore not thinkable to go to the field of the exception of execution. - It makes as many copies of the contract as there are parties to the deed. [...]

[...] BUT the consequences are important and numerous. = Imbalanced situation Section III - Commutative or Random Contracts > This distinction results from article 1108 of the civil code > Commutative contract: each party must provide the other with an ADVANTAGE EQUIVALENT to what they receive This is the vast majority of contracts This commutative character is totally subjective, what we ask is that the parties agree equivalence) > Random contract: uncertainty as to the benefits that one or more parties may derive from the execution of the contract RISK Example: lottery ticket In these contracts, we cannot make the 'detriment' mechanism work if the contract is particularly unbalanced, we can take legal action to complain) Section IV - Contracts at title onexcessive or at free title > It is article 1107 of the civil code that sets this distinction > Free title deed: act by which a person commits without receiving anything in return (we know very well that there will be nothing in return) Example: a donation These acts are considered by the law as abnormal in the sense that altruistic behavior is inconvenient, because it leads an individual to deprive themselves of a part of their assets There is a value that leaves the assets without any other value having a chance to enter = more rigorous and strict controls by the judge Often, free title deeds also have the specificity of being deeds intuitu personae ("intimately personal") The idea is that at" priori, l'the gratuitous act is rather intended for whoma which the'one knowst (since it is an altruistic act), and rhas been carried out in considerationqualification of qualityspecificisresults of the person who will benefit from it. [...]

[...] - Therefore, it will be necessary to find a balance between all these rights / freedomss. For example: contractual freedom comes into conflict with the right of property, in such a way that the judge must rule CIV 1ère December 2005 : has made property right prevail over contractual freedom.In the'spaceisthis, a person had contracted a prreal estate, and its lender had inserted a clause prohibiting the borrower from selling his property until he had repaid his loan, thus constituting a disproportionate infringement on the right of property. [...]