|
|
| 浅析《合同法》与《销售公约》关于“实质性变更”规定的异同 |
|
（二）两者共同之处
《合同法》与《公约》都规定关于“货物的数量、质量、解决争议的方法及其他条件”的变更为实质性变更。因这些条件为基础条件（“其他”是补充条件，为体现立法的严谨性）。
上述是作者的一点认识，两者内涵上的巨大差异，并不局限于作者在文中提及的范例。望对相关人士有一点启发，能成竹于胸、运筹帷幄，结合自身实际情况，作出有效承诺，使合同成立；或对要约作出利于己方的实质性修改，以等对方答复。切勿因对国内外法律规定不熟悉，而有误解，作出错误决策，坐以待“失”。
abstract
It is very important in prcaticing to realize the different regulations between the Chinese Contract Law and the United Nations Convention on International Sale of Goods Contracts on material alterations when an acceptance is made. The main difference exists as follows: 1)whether the offeree can reply with something unmentioned in the offer; 2)whether the offeree can alter the “performance style”; 3)and to change the scope of responsibility besides delivering goods and paying money, and so on, notwithstanding, that the reply made by the offeree is granted as an effective acceptance.
Key word: contract law, convention on sale of goods, acceptance, material alterations.
上一页 [1] [2]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
