國際條約及區域性立法整合方案

以下擬簡要引介數個國際條約及國際或區域性之立法整合方案，按由於其係 經跨國的討論之後被提出，或許可以從中觀察，對於不可抗力的相關概念上，雖 非全部，但至少是多數國家對此一議題的看法。

第一項 聯合國國際貨物買賣公約

(UN Convention on Contracts for International Sale of Goods, CISG)

制定於 1980 年的聯合國國際貨物買賣契約公約，是目前國際上適用最為廣泛

160 Shea-S&M Ball v. Massman-Kiewit-Early, 606 F.2d 1245, 1249 (D.C. Cir.1979).

161 42 U.S.C § 9607 (b). 對於此處所述之第三人行為，美國法上特別限定其要件於該法之責任主體 已盡其注意義務等情況。See, Joel Eagle, Divine Intervention: Re-examining the “Act of God” Defense in a Post-Katrina World, 82 Chi.-Kent L. Rev. 459, 461 (2007).

38

的關於貨物買賣契約之條約。在其第 7 部分中的第 79 條，儘管沒有明示”force

majeure”等文字，但一般認為係造成了與不可抗力概念相同的法律效果¹⁶²。由於該

公約是探討不可抗力概念內涵時最早的跨國性整合法律文件，故本文選擇為較詳

162 Ingeborg Schwenzer, Force Majeure and Hardship in International Sales Contracts, 39 Victoria U.

Wellington L. Rev. 709 (2008).

163 原文：「A party is not liable for a failure to perform any of his obligation if he proves that the failure was due to an impediment beyond his control and that he could not reasonably be expected to have taken the impediment into account at the time of the conclusion of the contract or to have avoided or overcome it or its consequences.」

164 Peter Schlechtriem (ed.), translated by Geoffrey Thomas, Commentary on the UN Convention on the International Sale of Goods (CISG), (2nd. ed., Oxford ; New York : Clarendon Press, 1998), 608, Art.79, 16. 165 id, at 608-613, Art. 79, 17-26.

166 CISG, Art. 79, (2)-(5):

(2) If the party's failure is due to the failure by a third person whom he has engaged to perform the whole or a part of the contract, that party is exempt from liability only if:

(a) he is exempt under the preceding paragraph; and

39

(exemption)稱之，似有所區隔，然而實際內容並無太大差異，甚至可謂幾乎一致¹⁶⁹。 該條僅有四項，最大之差異僅有缺少CISG Art.79(2)關於第三人所致之不履行是否

(b) the person whom he has so engaged would be so exempt if the provisions of that paragraph were applied to him.

(3) The exemption provided by this article has effect for the period during which the impediment exists.

(4) The party who fails to perform must give notice to the other party of the impediment and its effect on his ability to perform. If the notice is not received by the other party within a reasonable time after the party who fails to perform knew or ought to have known of the impediment, he is liable for damages resulting from such non-receipt.

(5) Nothing in this article prevents either party from exercising any right other than to claim damages under this Convention.

http://www.cisg.law.pace.edu/cisg/text/treaty.html (last visited on 03/15/2011)

167 See, Schlechtriem, supra note 164, at 614-616, 621, 622-624, Art. 79, 33-38, 48-49, 52-59.

168 PICC, ARTICLE 7.1.7(Force majeure)

(1) Non-performance by a party is excused if that party proves that the non-performance was due to an impediment beyond its control and that it could not reasonably be expected to have taken the impediment into account at the time of the conclusion of the contract or to have avoided or overcome it or its

consequences.

(2) When the impediment is only temporary, the excuse shall have effect for such period as is reasonable having regard to the effect of the impediment on the performance of the contract.

(3) The party who fails to perform must give notice to the other party of the impediment and its effect on its ability to perform. If the notice is not received by the other party within a reasonable time after the party who fails to perform knew or ought to have known of the impediment, it is liable for damages resulting from such non-receipt.

(4) Nothing in this article prevents a party from exercising a right to terminate the contract or to withhold performance or request interest on money due.

http://www.unidroit.org/english/principles/contracts/principles2004/blackletter2004-english.pdf (lsat visited on 03/15/2011).

169 有謂特別標明"force majeure"係為了與國際間普遍使用的”force majeure clause”之名稱連結。See, Stefan Vogenauer and Jan Kleinheisterkamp (ed.), Commentary on the UNIDROIT Principles of

International Commercial Contracts (PICC), (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2009), 767.

40

能夠免責之規定。其他各項，7.1.7(1)可對應於 79(1)、7.1.7(2)能對應於 79(3)，7.1.7(3) 與79(4)完全相同，而 7.1.7(4)相較於 79(5)則只是將未受影響的權利包括解除契約、

同時履行抗辯等直接規範，然而透過對CISG 之解釋，仍然可以獲致相同效果¹⁷⁰。 不同的點可能在於，針對情勢變更所產生之履約困難(hardship)，PICC 以 6.2.1-6.2.3 規範之，然而CISG 對此似乎較為嚴格¹⁷¹。

第三項 歐洲法共同參考架構草案

(Draft Common Frame of Reference, DCFR)

2008 年由歐洲多國學者完成的共同參考架構草案，可能揭示著未來歐洲聯盟 私法領域進一步合作立法的開端。當然，這份文件沒有任何的官方效力，但是藉 由觀察本文件對於不可抗力概念的說明，也能有效的了解歐洲多數國家學者在此 議題上的態度。

DCFR 關於不可抗力之相關概念，規範在 III-3:104，條文名稱係「因障礙之免 責」(Excuse due to an impediment)。與 CISG 相同，其亦未使用”force majeure”之用 語，然而在其正式評論中即認為，該條之要件與傳統之 force majeure 要求類似¹⁷²。

首先敘明者，DCFR 所欲規範的範圍並不只侷限於契約法領域，相較於前兩項 所討論之文件僅限於契約，顯然較為廣泛。是以，DCFR III-3:104 之要件即分為兩 項規範。III-3:104(1)先規定通則，謂債務人之債務不履行，係由於在其控制範圍之 外的障礙，且不能合理期待其能避免、克服障礙或其結果者，免除其責。III-3:104(2)

170 Kessedjian, supra note 51, at 422.

171 id, at 418.

172 Christian von Bar and Eric Clive, The Study Group on a European Civil Code and the Research Group on EC Private Law (Acquis Group) (ed.), Principles, Definitions and Model Rules of European Private Law : Draft Common Frame of Reference (DCFR), Vol. 1, (München : Sellier. European Law Publishers, 2009), 784.

41 當然包括解除或終止契約¹⁷⁵。另外，III-3:104(4)則是與前項為區隔，指出若障礙之 性質係永久者，債務即消滅，任何相互之給付當隨之消滅。至於前已給付者，則 適用回復原狀之相關規定。而III-3:104(5)則與 CISG 和 PICC 相關規範一致，皆課 與債務人通知義務，及規範未於合理期間內通知所生的損害賠償責任¹⁷⁶。

173 III-3:104(1): A debtor’s non-performance of an obligation is excused if it is due to an impediment beyond the debtor’s control and if the debtor could not reasonably be expected to have avoided or overcome the impediment or its consequences.

III-3:104(2): Where the obligation arose out of a contract or other juridical act, non-performance is not excused if the debtor could reasonably be expected to have taken the impediment into account at the time when the obligation was incurred.

174 Schwenzer, supra note 162, at 714.

175 Christian von Bar and Eric Clive, The Study Group on a European Civil Code and the Research Group on EC Private Law (Acquis Group) (ed.), supra note 172, at 786.

176 DCFR III-3:104(3)-(5):

(3) Where the excusing impediment is only temporary the excuse has effect for the period during which the impediment exists. However, if the delay amounts to a fundamental non-performance, the creditor may treat it as such.

(4) Where the excusing impediment is permanent the obligation is extinguished. Any reciprocal obligation is also extinguished. In the case of contractual obligations any restitutionary effects of extinction are regulated by the rules in Chapter 3, Section 5, Sub-section 4 (Restitution) with appropriate adaptations.

(5) The debtor has a duty to ensure that the notice of impediment and of its effect on the ability to perform reaches the creditor within a reasonable time after the debtor knew or reasonably be expected to have known of the circumstances. The creditor is entitled to damages for any loss resulting from non-receipt of such notice.

42