Dobrá víra jako princip smluvního práva v mezinárodním obchodu

Mgr. Zdeněk Nový, Ph.D., LL.M.

Doctoral thesis

Good Faith as a Principle of Contract Law in International Trade

Anotácia:

Tato práce nenabízí novou, „velkou“ teorii dobré víry v mezinárodním obchodu. Snaží se však nabídnout metodologicky originální a vědecky poctivou analýzu role a smyslu dobré víry v mezinárodním obchodu. Zaměřuje se především na kritické zkoumání toho, zda existuje jednotný a autonomní koncept dobré víry ve smluvním právu v mezinárodním obchodu. Disertační práce tedy rozebírá postavení a smysl dobré víry jako pradávného principu soukromého práva v moderních podmínkách mezinárodního obchodu. Výchozí myšlenkou přitom je, že dobrá víra má stále své místo ve smluvním právu a může být účinným nástrojem sankcionování právně relevantního neetického jednání v mezinárodním obchodu. Struktura disertační práce je následující: 1. Nejprve se zabýváme pojmem dobrá víra, specifikací jeho obsahu a vymezením jeho postavení vůči jiným institutům a doktrínám soukromého práva a jeho „pro“ a „proti“. Snažíme se tedy odpovědět na otázku „co?“ 2. Dále se věnujeme postavení dobré víry v širším kontextu teorií smluvního práva. Cílem této části je formulovat určitá obecná ideová východiska, na nichž tato práce spočívá. Ve svém celku má druhá část odpověděť na otázku „kde?“, v jakém kontextu se dobrá víra nachází. 3. Následně vymezujeme metodologii této práce a stanovení pracovních hypotéz. Odpovídáme tedy na otázku „jak?“. 4. Poté se již zaměřujeme na rozbor dobré víry v rámci pramenů smluvního práva státního původu. Zahrnuta je analýza dobré víry v právu německém, francouzském, anglickém a právu Spojených států. 5. V zápětí pojednáváme o dobré víře v pramenech smluvního práva nestátního původu. Konkrétně se pak jedná o její analýzu v rámci Úmluvy OSN o smlouvách o mezinárodní koupi zboží, Principů mezinárodních obchodních smluv UNIDROIT a tzv. Draft Common Frame of Reference. 6. V další části disertační práce zkoumáme možnosti a meze autonomomního principu dobré víry v mezinárodním rozhodčím řízení. Zde měníme perspektivu, když od analýzy dobré víry v pramenech smluvního práva přecházíme k rozboru jejího postavení v mezinárodním rozhodčím řízení. 7. Nakonec shrnujeme poznatky dosažené v této práci.

Abstract:

The Principle of Good Faith in the Law of International Commercial Contracts This thesis offers no grand theory of a good faith in international trade. Nevertheless, although it analyses the good faith as an ancient and well-known legal principle, it does not aim to serve an old wine in new bottles. This thesis rather seeks to approach the good faith by using the methodology allowing for handling this fairly abstract topic. It also intends to provide an in-depth analysis of good faith in the sources of contract law in international trade. The concept of ‘contractual ethics’ has been chosen as a methodological point of departure. A contractual ethic informs the parties to a contract to what extent they have to pay regard to mutual interests. Hence, it has been argued that different sources of contract law have different ethics, ranging from a cooperative ethic on the one side of the spectrum to an individualistic ethic on another side. The ‘true’ cooperative ethic expects the party to a contract to sacrifice its own interests on the altar of the interests of the other party, whereas the individualistic ethic does not require the parties to have regard to their mutual interests at all. It is indeed argued that purely cooperative or individual contractual ethics are rather ideal opposite ends of the imaginary spectrum. Real contract laws then lie somewhere inbetween them, some being closer to the cooperative ethic and the others to the individual one. Good faith forms part of cooperative ethics, and therefore requires the parties to take mutual interests into account. Yet what is the interface between good faith and cooperative ethics? It is submitted, in the first place, that cooperative ethics restricts the possibility of the parties to contract good faith out. Secondly, if a particular cooperative ethic imposes a duty to act in good faith, it may be expected that its breach has some legal consequences resulting in certain remedies. The latter are thus examined in this thesis. Thirdly, no attempt is made to define good faith in international trade as this has proved to be a futile excercise or this may equate at best to opening can of worms. Moreover, the definition of good faith is, after all, unnecessary for it appears more important to analyse how it functions in specific factual circumstances. Nonetheless, an analytical tool to explain what good faith means within a cooperative contractual ethic is necessary. Therefore, it is argued that the functions of good faith may provide a suitable analytical instrument. The functional approach should enable us to systematize the ‘cooperative code of contractul ethics’ embodied by good faith. The functions of good faith may be broken down into three categories: - A corrective function; - a supplementary function; - an interpretation function. Proceeding from what has been said, the following criteria serve as tertia comparationis: - The possibility of parties to contract good faith out; - functions of good faith; - remedies for the breach of good faith. These criteria are thereafter compared among the sources of contract law in international commerce. Subsequently, there being no universally accepted classification of sources of contract law in international trade, these are categorized in this thesis into those of a state and non-state origin. The former are the result of legislative action of national law-makers, whereas the latter are created outside the national legislative procedures. The analysed sources of contract law of state origin are German law; French law; English law; and the Law of the United States. The non-state sources are the United Nations Convention on Contracts for International Sale of Goods; Principles of International Commercial Contracts UNIDROIT; and a so-called Draft Common Frame of Reference. The first hypothesis is that if the three above-mentioned criteria are identical between the state and non-state sources of contract law, there is a unifo

Abstract:

rm concept of good faith in international trade. Jumping from the hypothesis to the conclusion, we have found that there is no uniform concept of good faith in international trade, as the above-mentioned criteria differ amongst the sources of contract law. The criteria have displayed less uniformity in the sources of contract law of state origin than those of non-state origin. It has been found that particularly remedies for breach of good faith differ in the sources of state orgin. Also, it has been demonstrated that the extent of functions varies among the sources of contract law in international trade. However, our research has indicated that not only the extent of criteria is different, but also the intensity of criteria may be stronger in one source of contract law than in another. In a foregoing text, we have examined good faith according to the sources of contract law, while having in mind national judge applying the source of contract law of state or non-state origin. Hence, when formulating the first hypothesis we had in mind national judge applying state law on the basis of conflict-of-laws methodology. National courts may use solely a private-international-law methodology in deciding the disputes arising from international commercial contracts. Thus, at the end of the day, national courts always apply national law or an international uniform treaty to international commercial transactions. They may therefore construe and apply good faith only as stipulated by the state, or possibly non-state sources of contract law. This would be, however, only a half-way analysis of good faith in international contract law, if no attention were paid to the fact that international arbitrators use different methodology of application of law to international commercial contracts than courts. In contrast to national courts, international arbitration opens an avenue for transnational legal solutions to the disputes arising from international commercial contracts. It is common knowledge that international arbitrators do not have forum hence do not have to apply, in principle, any state law in deciding on the merits of a dispute. It is also submitted that one of the reasons why the parties to international commercial contracts go to arbitration is that they expect a different kind of justice, as far as the substance of the dispute is concerned, than before national courts. In consequence, arbitrators may or perhaps should apply legal concepts independently of their understanding in national laws. In connection to these considerations, the question arises as to whether there might be any transnational or autonomous concept of good faith in international arbitration. By autonomous we mean that good faith is independent of the concept of good faith as laid down in the sources of contract law in international trade. Admittedly, this train of thought has a strong lex-mercatoria flavour. Indeed, the aim is to test whether international arbitrators actually recognise good faith as an autonomnous principle, being said to be one of the essential ingredients of lex mercatoria. The second hypothesis may thus be formulated as follows: There is an autonomous concept of good faith recognised in international arbitration. The method employed to verify this hypothesis is the empirical analysis of arbitration awards of the International Arbitration Court of the International Chamber of Commerce in Paris. The number of analysed arbitration awards is eighteen. To be sure, any far-reaching conclusions can be drawn from this number of arbitration awards. It is argued, however, that even if on the balance of probabilities, the analysis of these arbitration awards still enables us to make important conclusions regarding the proper understanding of good faith in the law of international commercial contracts. The outcome of the examination of arbitration awards has been that international arbitrators have applied the concept of good faith in the vast majority of cases as provided in the source of contract law of state origin. Consequently, only two arbitration awards display rather uncertain signs of a sort of ‘autonomous’ concept of good faith. Moreover, one of these arbitration awards perceives good faith to be an autonomous principle stemming from the convergence between national contract laws. Indeed, the notions of good faith, as enshrined in the state contracts laws, are lurking beneath the surface of good faith in international arbitration. International arbitrators have some notion of what might be called the ‘transnational principle of good faith’ in the sense of a quasi-universal acceptance of good faith. However, it is interesting to see that arbitrators, empirically speaking, apply most often the concept of good faith contained in the state sources of contract law in international commerce. However, this is not the whole story. It is indeed quite surprising finding that international arbitrators tend to apply the concept of good faith under national laws in a different way than national courts, albeit this has been proved only in two cases out of eighteen. The empirical analysis of arbitration awards has also demonstrated that it is more correct to speak of a ‘transnational’ approach to good faith than a transnational concept of good faith. The transnational approach to good faith means, in terms of empirical data, that arbitrators seek to assure the parties that the former do not apply the principle of good faith to their contract, so to say, myopically. To this end, arbitrators, while mostly using in arbitration awards the concept of good faith enshrined in the sources of contract law of state origin, refer also to other sources of contract law, whether of state or non-state origin, containing the principle of good faith. These references nonetheless cannot be described as a sort of a sophisticated comparative methodology, but rather as a kind of comparative notes corroborating the legal solution arbitrators arrived at in a specific case. This ‘methodology of comparative notes’ thus should not be considered as a proof of the existence of good faith as an autonomous principle. To the contrary, it rather underscores the importance of the concepts of good faith in the state sources of contract law in international commerce. In summary, the second hypothesis has been refuted, since no autonomous principle of good faith has been found in a sample of examined arbitration awards.

Kľúčové slová

Dobrá víra, etika a právo, mezinárodní obchod, smlouva, smluvní právo Good Faith, Ethics and Law, International Trade, Contract, Contract Law

Jazyk práce: Czech

Datum vytvoření / odevzdání či podání práce: 12. 9. 2011

Obhajoba závěrečné práce

• Obhajoba proběhla 25. 1. 2012
• Vedúci: prof. JUDr. Naděžda Rozehnalová, CSc.
• Oponent: prof. JUDr. Jan Hurdík, DrSc., prof. JUDr. Ján Švidroň, CSc.

Masaryk University

Faculty of Law

Doctoral programme / odbor:
Theoretical Legal Sciences (4-years) / International Private Law