论合同的法定形式

形式自由是契约自由的必然要求。然而出于保存证据、促使当事人慎重考虑等因素,法律仍需对于某些形式的合同作法定形式的要求。问题是,对于不具法定形式要求的合同,应如何加以处理,我国现行立法存有缺陷,未能明确判定不具形式要求究竟会导致合同不成立还是仅仅影响合同的效力。另外,如果影响合同效力的话,应如何区分不同的效果?本文在比较法考察的基础上,探讨了法定形式的宗旨及类型,并着重从利益衡量的角度,分析不具法定形式要求的合同的三种后果,即:无效、经补正而有效及有效但内容依法律的规定而作调整。

On the Legal Form of a Contract

The freedom of formality is a prerequisite condition for the freedom of a contract.However,laws set forth requirements with regard to the legal forms of a contract in view of evidence preserving and promoting contracting parties' prudence. Questions arise when contracts are entered into without legal forms.Existing Chinese statutes are,to some extent,flawed in order to judge whether a contract without legal forms are invalid or still partially effective,and also they fail to provide perspicuous guidance in the latter circumstances.This article discusses the objective and types of legal forms by means of comparative laws studies.By scale of benefits,it offers analysis on the three consequences resulting from contracts not required of legal forms,which are invalid,valid by amendment,and valid by content adjustment ipso jure.