Set forth below is the beginning of a comparative analysis of substantive international contract law. With respect to the various subjects examined, mention is made of the rules of law developed by the various sources of contract law and international contract law including UNIDROIT’s Principles of International Commercial Contracts (the PICC”) and the official Comments thereon, the Lando Commission’s Principles of European Contract Law (the “PECL”), the United Nations Convention On Contracts For The International Sale Of Goods (the « CISG »), the Uniform Commercial Code (the “UCC”) and national laws, particularly American and English common law and French law. Reference is also made to standard contractual provisions set forth in international contracts with respect to the various subject matters.
Freedom of Contract and Mandatory Law
The laws of most of the major trading countries in the world recognize the principle of freedom of contract in the context of international trade. The principle of freedom of contract is recognized by the Unidroit principles (Art. 1.1) and the European principles (Art. 1.102 (1) which, however, subjects this freedom to the requirements of good faith and fair dealing and the mandatory rules in the principles).
French law:
Article 1101 of the French Civil Code:
Le contrat est une convention par laquelle une ou plusieurs personnes s’obligent, envers une ou plusieurs autres, à donner, à faire ou à ne pas faire quelque chose.
In France, there is no norm of constitutional value which guarantees the principle of contractual freedom. However, the French Constitutional Council has held that the legislature cannot violate the economy of agreements and contracts legally entered into in such a serious manner as to manifestly ignore the freedom resulting from Article 4 of the 1789 “Déclaration des droit de l’homme et du citoyen”.
There are, of course, numerous sectors where European as well as American and other national laws regulate commerce and contain provisions from which the parties to an international contract may not derogate. The PICC and the PECL both point out that their principles shall not restrict the application of certain national, international or supranational “mandatory” rules. (PICC Art. 1.4 and PECL Art. 1.103).
The PICC and the PECL also contain provisions which are mandatory in that the parties choosing the application of the PICC or the PECL cannot exclude or modify them. See for example, Article 1.7 of the PICC and Art. 1.201 of the PECL with respect the fundamental requirement of “good faith and fair dealing”.
Good Faith and Fair Dealing
The requirement for parties to a contract to act in good faith is a standard of behavior of a mandatory character under most domestic laws.
Art. 1134 of the French Civil Code: “Les conventions légalement formées tiennent lieu de loi à ceux qui les ont faites. Elles doivent être executes de bonne foi.”
Good faith and fair dealing is a fundamental idea in the PICC (Art. 1.7) and the PECL (Art. 1.201). Under the PECL, there is also a duty to co-operate (Art. 1.202), but unlike the duty of good faith and fair dealing, it is not stated to be mandatory.
American law may be somewhat less protective, hence the usefulness of providing a contractual clause requiring the parties to act in good faith:
The parties expressly agree to fulfill their obligations hereunder in good faith. Each party agrees to take or cause to be taken any and all further steps and to execute or cause to be executed any and all further documents as may be reasonably necessary to effect and carry out fully all the transactions contemplated herein.
However, UCC 1-203 provides that every “contract… imposes an obligation of good faith in its performance or enforcement.” Likewise, Restatement §205 provides that every “contract imposes upon each party a duty of good faith in its performance or enforcement.”
Garman law: §240 BGB true und glauber – requirement to perform in good faith - a standard of honest, loyal and considerate behavior.
UK law is not as protective, but the courts will sanction bad faith under notions of fraud, misrepresentation, negligent misstatement (tort liability).
Confidentiality
Each party to a contractual negotiation is bound by a general duty of confidentiality not to disclose or use for its own personal interest confidential information, trade secrets or the like which may have been communicated to it during such negotiation. This obligation exists whether or not a contract is concluded and even after the end of a contract. See also PICC Art. 2.16 and PECL 2.302.17
Suggested contract provision:
The ________ and the _________ shall keep totally confidential and shall not disclose the terms and conditions of this Agreement or the transactions envisioned herein or any documents or information exchanged among the parties to any third party nor make any public announcement relating thereto without the consent of the other party, except where such disclosure is required by law and then only after notice to the other party.
It is also useful to specify exactly what information or kind of information is to be treated as confidential.
Pre-Contractual Stage
Some important ideas to remember:
Once all the material elements of a contract are determined and there is an intent to contract, a pre-contractual situation may become a contract, so beware. If a material element is missing, there is no contract.
To exclude contractual liability, state so in the document in question. If you are not sure or you want some contractual liability, it may be best to say nothing.
Pre-contractual liability is usually in tort (responsabilité délictuelle). See Art 1382 of the French Civil Code: “Tout fait quelconque de l’homme, qui cause à autrui un dommage, oblige celui par la faute duquel il est arrive à le réparer.” A party which abusively breaks off contractual negotiations can be held liable for the resulting harm to its co-contractor. (See Comm., 7 avril 1997, Banque franco-allemande c/ Banque Eurolactique; Com., 22 avril 1997, Sté Iveco France c/ Sté Mabo; Com., 7 avril 1998, Sté Laboratoires Sandoz c/ Sté Poleval.) French law has evolved notions like the obligation to inform, the duty to cooperate and abuse of law (abus de droit).
German law and Italian law have the notion of culpa in contrahendo which sanctions blameworthy conduct during negotiations.
Parties must at all times act in good faith, even during the negotiation of contracts
There is also a duty of confidentially during the pre-contractual phase.
Terms: deal memorandum, gentleman’s agreement, agreement to agree, letter of intent (protocole d’accord), promise to contract, heads of agreement, pacte de preference, confidentiality agreement, non-competition and non solicitation agreements, options, etc.
Certain provisions will survive the failure of negotiations (confidentiality, non-disclosure, dispute resolution clause, etc.)
Comfort letters. Two kinds – best efforts and “insure that (faire en sorte que) (obligation de moyens et obligation de résultat).
As to the necessity of having a price, see 8 below.
Remember the document for signing up players for the professional rugby organization (“I hereby confirm my intent (and agreement) to …”).
Examples:
- Pennzoil v. Texaco (memorandum of understanding signed, but subject to final contract, held to constitute a contract, damages of over $10 billion awarded):
Under New York law, if parties do not intend to be bound to an agreement until it is reduced to writing and signed by both parties, then there is no contract until that event occurs…. If there is no understanding that a signed writing is necessary before the parties will be bound, and the parties have agreed upon all substantial terms, then an informal agreement can be binding, even though the parties contemplate evidencing their agreement in a formal document later….
For a contract to be enforceable, the terms of the agreement must be ascertainable to a reasonable degree of certainty…. The question of whether the agreement is sufficiently definite to be enforceable is a difficult one. The facts of the individual case are decisively important. [cites omitted] "The agreement need not be so definite that all the possibilities that might occur to a party in bad faith are explicitly provided for, but it must be sufficiently complete so that parties in good faith can find in the agreement words that will fairly define their respective duties and liabilities." Id. On review, the agreement must be sufficiently definite for the court to be able to recognize a breach and to fashion a remedy for that breach.
Kim Bassenger (Boxing Helena case) (draft of contract written, but not signed, held to be a contract, settlement for $3.8 million) cases.
Consider the differences between the two following situations:
Gentlemen's Agreements
Can parties prevent the enforcement of their promises by governmental machinery if they expressly so provide?
"In Rose & Frank v. Crompton, 2 K.B. 261, at p. 293 [1923], a written
agreement regulating the commercial relations of the parties to it contained the following clause: 'This arrangement is not entered into, nor is this memorandum written, as a formal or legal agreement, and shall not be subject to legal jurisdiction in the law courts either in the United States or England, but it is only a definite expression and record of the purpose and intention of the three parties concerned to which they each honourably pledge themselves with the fullest confidence, based on past business with each other, that it will be carried through by each of the three parties with mutual loyalty and friendly co-operation.’/The Court of Appeal (Bankes, Scrutton and Atkin, L. JJ.) held that the document did not constitute a binding contract, and this decision was afterwards affirmed in the House of Lords- see [1925] A.C. 445. . . . Atkin, L. J., at p. 293, said: I have never seen such a clause before, but I see nothing necessarily absurd in businessmen seeking to regulate their business relations by mutual promises which fall short of legal obligations, and rest on obligations of honour or self-interest, or perhaps both.’” Sol.L.J. 769 (1932).
McDonald signed an acknowledgment of indebtedness to Smith for $5,000, the instrument stipulating that "it is part and parcel of this acknowledgment . . . that it shall be void should legal steps of any kind be taken to force payment". Smith sued McDonald on the instrument. Held: For defendant. The promise to pay constituted only a moral obligation. Smith v. McDonald, 37 Cal.App. 503, 174 P. 80 (1918). See Corbin, § 34; Parry, The Changing Conception of Contracts in English Law (1958).
Example of a more binding letter of intent
The following letter was signed in 1995 by virtually all of the top French rugby players with a view to participating in a professional world rugby organization:
ABC. Pty Limited
Sydney
Australia
Dear Sirs:
You have indicated to me that ABC Pty Limited ("ABC")
undertaken to create an international organization for
professional Rugby Union football comprised of at least three
Conferences - Northern, Central and Southern - with a minimum
of ten regional teams in each Conference. You have further
indicated that in order to finalize the financing and
establishment of the worldwide network, it is essential for ABC
to obtain the commitment of a total minimum of 900 players for
thirty teams (including 90 players for three French teams) to
participate in national, regional and international
championships and other special events to be conducted by, or
in conjunction with, ABC.
In this context, I hereby confirm my (firm) intent (and agreement)
to become a player for one of the three professional Rugby
Union football teams to be created in France, subject only to:
ABC having funds available to it in excess of US$ 100 million
by October 31, 1995; or ABC having executed contracts with
commercial enterprises such as for television rights,
sponsorship or other commitments to the competition sufficient
for ABC to meet its contractual obligations. An employment
agreement shall be signed no later than such date with ABC or
an entity which ABC shall create or cause to be created to
manage the French team for which I shall play. Such agreement
shall, of course, be in full compliance with all applicable
laws and regulations including, in particular, with respect to
social security.
The employment agreement shall, to the extent legally possible
conform to ABC's standard terms and conditions of employment
which are based on the exclusivity provisions used in high
level worldwide professional sports.
My employment shall effectively commence on November 7, 1995
and be for a minimum of three playing seasons (approximately
March - October), ending at the close of the 1998 season.
During such period, I shall not enter into any other agreement
inconsistent with my obligations to the ABC. However, I shall
not be prevented from following any other occupation or
business, provided such shall not interfere with my obligations
to the ABC.
In consideration of my employment during the three-year period
described above, I shall be entitled to receive a gross
remuneration to be calculated on the basis of $US ____
which sum shall include all social and other charges due by the
employer with respect to my status as a salaried employee
("Charges"). Such remuneration shall consist of: (a) a contract
fee of US$ (- social charges) ; and (b) a playing fee of
US$ _____ (- social charges) during each of the three years.
(a) The contract fee shall be paid as follows: ten percent
(10%) on or before November 1, 1995; (b) ten percent (10%) on
or before March 1, 1996; and the balance in equal monthly
installments, in arrears, over the remainder of the period of
employment.
(b) The playing fee shall be paid as follows: ten percent
(10%) of the Year 1 fee on or before November 7, 1995; a
further ten percent (10%) of the Year 1 fee on or before March
1, 1996; the balance of the Year 1 fee in equal monthly
installments, in arrears, over Year 1; the Year 2 fee in equal
monthly installments, in arrears, over Year 2; and the Year 3 fee in equal monthly installments over the remainder of the period of
employment.
Unless the condition referred to in the second paragraph of
page 1 hereof shall be met, ABC shall have no contractual
obligation whatsoever to make any payment envisioned herein. A
letter from the accounting firm of Ernst & Young certifying
that such condition has been met will be sufficient evidence of
the meeting of such condition.
I represent and warrant that, as of the date hereof and as of
the date of the signing of the employment agreement, I shall be
fully free and able to perform all my obligations envisioned
herein and in the employment agreement.
I expressly agree that until November 7, 1995 I shall not enter
into any letter of intent, agreement, understanding or
arrangement of any nature whatsoever with any other party to
play Rugby Union, Rugby League or any similar football game.
The terms of this letter shall remain strictly confidential
shall not be disclosed by either party without the prior
written consent of the other, except that ABC may disclose the
existence of such letters (without mentioning the players
involved) to prospective investors, sponsors, licensees of ABC
rights, etc., in order to secure the necessary financing and
sponsoring for the ABC organization.
ABC shall have the right to substitute any third party of its
choice with respect to the execution hereof.
If you agree with the above, please sign a copy of this letter
in the space indicated below.
Sincerely,
Agreed to and accepted:
______________ ABC Pty Limited
Questions: If you were the company in the above situation, what more would you want to do to be sure you had the strongest possible “contract”? If you were a player, how would you want to limit your obligations?
Formation of Contract - Offer, Withdrawal, Revocation
There are essentially two requirements for the existence of an offer – that it be sufficiently definite and that it indicate an intent to be bound.
See American contract law above. Remember an offer must be: (1) made with the intention to contract; (2) definite, reasonably certain and complete; 3) more than mere preliminary negotiations; and (4) communicated by the offeror to the offeree.
PICC Art 2.2:
A proposal for concluding a contract constitutes an offer if it is sufficiently definite and indicates the intention of the offeror to be bound in case of acceptance.
To the same effect, see PECL Art. 2.201
CISG Art 14:
(1) A proposal for concluding a contract addressed to one or more specific persons constitutes an offer if it is sufficiently definite and indicates the intention of the offeror to be bound in case of acceptance. A proposal is sufficiently definite if it indicates the goods and expressly or implicitly fixes or makes provision for determining the quantity and the price.
(2) A proposal other than one addressed to one or more specific persons is to be considered merely as an invitation to make offers, unless the contrary is clearly indicated by the person making the proposal.
UCC 2-204 (3):
Even though one or more terms are left open a contract for sale does not fail for indefiniteness if the parties have intended to make a contract and there is a reasonably certain basis for giving an appropriate remedy.
Generally, the offer becomes effective when it reaches the offeree (PICC Art. 2.3, PECL Art., CISG Art. 15 (1)).
Generally, revocation of an offer is effective if it reaches the offeree before it has dispatched its acceptance. (US majority view, PICC Art. 2.4 (1), PECL 2.202 (1) and CISG Art. 16 (1).
Formation of contract – acceptance, rejection of offer, counter-offer
“Mirror image rule” in US case law. Remember that under common law, an acceptance had to be unequivocal and unconditional; if it contained different or additional terms, it constituted a counter-offer.
Battle of the forms. This was changed by the UCC which provides (§ 2-207) that additional incidental terms become part of the contract unless the offeror has limited acceptance to the terms of the offer or objects to them. Whether an additional term is part of the contract depends on whether it is considered to be material. The UCC is less rigid and seems more in favor of the existence of a contract.
Art 19 of the CISG undoes this evolution of the UCC and is closer to the old common law rule. Art 19 provides that an acceptance with additional or modified terms is a counter offer unless they are not material and the offeror does not object to them. Material terms include price, payment, quality and quantity of goods, place and time of delivery, warranties or liabilities and dispute resolution clause.
Under the UCC, a stipulation for arbitration in an acceptance would not keep a contract from arising. There would be a contract and a question; that is, does the contract contain an arbitration clause? The answer would turn on whether such a clause is "material." Under the CISG, it is likely that there would be no contract.
The PICC and the PECL both provide that only a reply that states different or additional terms which substantially modify the offer constitute a rejection and counter offer (PICC 2.1118 and PECL 2.20819).
Informality of CISG The CISG is more informal in that, unlike the UCC (which requires that contracts for the sale of goods for more than $500 are not enforceable) and the common law as modified by the statute of frauds, it does not require contracts for the sale of goods to be in writing.
Consideration
See American law above. Historically, consideration related more to rules of procedure to determine the existence of a contract, is now a substantive rule of American contract law. Consideration is a detriment to the promisee or benefit to the promisor, bargained for and given in exchange for a promise.
The equivalent in French law is cause. Article 1131 of the French Civil Code provides: “L’obligation sans cause, ou sur une fausse cause, ou sur une cause illicite, ne peut avoir aucun effet.”
There is no mention of consideration in the
PICC or PECL.
Price
French law: Normally a price has to be déterminé ou déterminable.
Article 1591:
Le prix de la vente doit être déterminée et désigné par les parties.
Article 1592:
Il peut cependant être laissé à l’arbitrage d’un tiers; si le tiers ne veut ou ne peut faire l’estimation, il n’y a point de vente.
US law: It is possible to have a contract even in the absence of a price if it appears that the parties have the intent to be bound and the price can be fixed objectively and in good faith, even by one of the parties. (See also UCC 2-305.)
CISG (Art. 14): A proposal is sufficiently definite if it indicates the goods and expressly or implicitly fixes or makes provision for determining the quantity and the price.
PICC (Art. 5.7): If there is no price, reference is made to:
to the price generally charged at the time of the conclusion of the contract for such performance in comparable circumstances in the trade concerned or, if no such price is available, to a reasonable price.
e. PECL (Art. 6.104): If there is no price, the parties are considered as having agreed to a “reasonable” price.
Interpretation
a. American law
See American law rules above. Remember that interpretation is usually not allowed if the contract is clear on its face, especially if the contract contains an “entire agreement” clause. Civil law, the CISG, the PICC and the PECL give more weight to the underlying intent of the parties.
b. French law:
Art. 1156
One must in agreements seek what the common intention of the contracting parties was, rather than pay attention to the literal meaning of the terms.
Art. 1157
Where a clause admits of two meanings, one shall rather understand it in the one with which it may have some effect, than in the meaning with which it could not produce any.
Art. 1158
Terms which admit of two meanings shall be taken in the meaning which best suits the subject matter of the contract.
Art. 1159
What is ambiguous shall be interpreted by what is in use in the region where the contract was made.
Art. 1160
Terms which are customary shall be supplemented in the contract, even though they are not expressed there.
Art. 1161
All the clauses of an agreement are to be interpreted with reference to one another by giving to each one the meaning which results from the whole instrument.
Art. 1162
In case of doubt, an agreement shall be interpreted against the one who has stipulated, and in favor of the one who has contracted the obligation.
Art. 1163
However general the terms in which an agreement is phrased may be, it shall include only the things upon which the parties appear to have intended to contract.
Art. 1164
Where in a contract one case was expressed for explaining the obligation, it shall not be deemed that it was thereby intended to reduce the scope of the agreement which extends as of right to cases not expressed.
c. Swiss law:
A contract must be applied as it is written unless the contractual language ceases to be clear. In such case, it is the intent of the parties which prevails. This means that substance prevails over form (Article 18 SCO).
The principle of confidence (principe de la confiance), also referred to as the principle of efficient appearance (principe de l’apparance efficace): requires that one party acting in good faith is bound by the interpretation which it knew or should have known that the other party was giving, in good faith, to the contractual language in question.
d. CISG:
Like the PICC and the PECL, the CSIG makes it easier to become bound by an enforceable contract. It makes it possible to contradict and supersede the clear words of a signed written contract by testimony and other evidence showing that the written contract is not consistent with the real agreement between the parties see Articles 8 and 9 of the CISG).
e. PICC:
(Chapter 4): Importance of the common intent of the parties. If intent cannot be established, look at “the meaning that reasonable persons of the same kind as the parties would give to it in the same circumstances.” Relevant circumstances are all circumstances including preliminary negotiations, past practices and conduct of the parties, nature and purpose of the contract, meaning commonly given in the trade concerned.
Would the following provisions of the PICC (Art. 4.2 (1) and (2) change the result in the case of Lucy v. Zehmer?
(1) The statements and other conduct of a party shall be interpreted according to that party’s intention if the other party knew or could not have been unaware of that intention.
(2) If the preceding paragraph is not applicable, such statements and other conduct shall be interpreted according to the meaning that a reasonable person of the same kind as the other party would give to it in the same circumstances.
Other rules: reference to contract as a whole, give all terms effect, contra proferentum rule, preference for interpretation according to a version in which the contract was originally drafted, etc. In all cases, appropriate terms shall be determined with regard to the intent of the parties, the nature and purpose of the contract, good faith and fair dealing and reasonableness.
PECL:
Rules a very similar. The primary concern is the intent of the parties, even if it differs from the literal meaning of the words.
Performance
The PICC and PECL contain rules relating to the time of performance (as stated in the contract, or, if not, within a reasonable time), partial performance (a party may object unless it has no interest to object), order of performance (simultaneous performance to be made when possible; exception where performance of one party requires a period of time, he is usually to perform first), earlier performance (a party may object unless he has no legitimate interest to do so) and place of performance (general rule that a party performs at its place of business, re monetary obligations, obligor performs at obliges business. To avoid application of these rules, specify all relevant performance matters in the contract.
Non-Performance, Termination of Contract (Including Anticipatory Breach and Restitution)
A material breach or, in the words of the PICC and the PECL, fundamental non-performance by one party allows the other party to terminate the contract and seek remedies including damages.
For example, Arts. 49 and 64 of the CISG permit a buyer or a seller to avoid the contract if the party’s failure to perform amounts to a “fundamental breach” of contract. Art. 25 defines a fundamental breach as follows:
A breach of contract committed by one of the parties is fundamental if it results in such detriment to the other party as substantially to deprive him of what he is entitled to expect under the contract, unless the party in breach did not foresee and a reasonable person of the same kind in the same circumstances would not have foreseen such a result.
Art 7.3.1 of the PICC and 8.103 of the PECL define a non performance of an obligation to be fundamental if: (a) strict compliance with the obligation is of the essence of the contract; (b) it deprives the aggrieved party of what it was entitled to expect under the contract (unless the other party did not foresee and could not reasonably have foreseen that result); (c) it is intentional or reckless and causes a loss of confidence in the breaching party. (See also Arts. 49 and 64 of the CISG).
The aggrieved party must give notice of termination.
Under certain circumstances, notification may allow the breaching party to cure its breach.
Share with your friends: |