English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  全文筆數/總筆數 : 81712/111165 (74%)
造訪人次 : 21228302      線上人數 : 474
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜尋範圍 查詢小技巧:
  • 您可在西文檢索詞彙前後加上"雙引號",以獲取較精準的檢索結果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜尋,建議至進階搜尋限定作者欄位,可獲得較完整資料
  • 進階搜尋
    請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/114446


    題名: 無權代理人對善意相對人之責任
    Liability of Unauthorized Agent to Bona Fide Contracting Party
    作者: 陳添輝
    Chen, Tien-Huei
    關鍵詞: 無權代理人之意定擔保責任;無權代理人之法定擔保責任;締約過失責任;信賴利益;履行利益;間接代理;直接代理;相對人;履行契約;損害賠償
    Unauthorized Agent's Implied Warranty of Authority;Unauthorized Agent's Warranty of Authority Mandated by Law;Culpa in Contrahendo;Reliance Interest;Expectation Interest;Undisclosed Agency;(partially) Disclosed Agency;the Other Contracting Party;Performance of Contract;Damages
    日期: 2016-09
    上傳時間: 2017-11-07 14:54:53 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 所謂無權代理人之法定擔保責任,係指法律規定代理人應擔保代理權限存在;否則,無權代理人應使善意相對人所處之法律上地位,如同無權代理人具有代理權一樣。換言之,善意相對人對無權代理人之請求,係以代理人具有代理權或本人承認無權代理行為時,善意相對人得請求本人給付之範圍為限。本人如果契約不履行,原則上僅負過失之損害賠償責任。然而,最高法院五十六年臺上字第三○五號判例,卻使無權代理人負無過失之損害賠償責任,因此值得進一步研究。債務人賠償債權人履行利益,前提要件是,契約有效成立。然而,無權代理人所訂立之契約,本人拒絕承認時,效力不及於本人,亦不及於代理人。最高法院九○年度臺上字第一九二三號判決使無權代理人負履行利益之損害賠償責任,亦有研究之空間。
    An agent's warranty of authority refers to the situation in which an agent warrants-to all who deal with him in that capacity-that he has the authority which he assumes; otherwise, the unauthorized agent is responsible for his acts in the course of his agency, leaving the legal status of his contracting party unchanged. The bona fide contracting party's claim to the unauthorized agent is limited to the performance of the principal under the circumstances that the agent is authorized or that unauthorized acts of agents are ratified by the principal. When the principal breaches the contract, in principle, only negligence would be pursued. Why, then, does a precedent laid down by the Supreme Court in 1967 found that strict liability should be imposed upon the unauthorized agent for damages? Article 110 of the Civil Code does not expressly provide the imposition of strict liability on an unauthorized agent for damages. Why does the said Supreme Court precedent ruled that the liability of the unauthorized agent is a special liability based on the provisions of the Civil Code and is categorized as strict liability? Expectation damages refer to the value that the creditor would have realized had the contract, after its conclusion, been fulfilled by the debtor. In other words, the prerequisite for a debtor to pay a creditor expectation damages is that a contract must be effective. Without the principal's ratification, the contract signed by the unauthorized agent binds neither the principal nor the agent. Why does a decision given by the Supreme Court in 2001 make the unauthorized agent liable for expectation damages? Because provisions of the Civil Code and theories in Taiwan are mostly rooted in those of European countries, to resolve the aforementioned questions, this study analyzes and reviews the laws in Taiwan by means of legal history and comparative legal studies of European countries.
    關聯: 政大法學評論, 146, 195-257
    資料類型: article
    DOI 連結: http://dx.doi.org/10.3966/102398202016090146004
    DOI: 10.3966/102398202016090146004
    顯示於類別:[法學評論 TSSCI] 期刊論文

    文件中的檔案:

    檔案 描述 大小格式瀏覽次數
    146-4.pdf2067KbAdobe PDF143檢視/開啟


    在政大典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - 回饋