Teorija o pravnom osnovu raskidanja ili izmene ugovora zbog promenjenih okolnosti: francuska sudska praksa i doktrina

Abstract

Važeći princip francuskog prava je da ugovor ne može biti raskinut ili izmenjen zbog nastupanja promenjenih okolnosti koje remete ravnotežu uzajamnih davanja u dvostranim ugovorima. Najznačajniji izuzetak od tog principa učinjen je u praksi Državnog saveta koji, primenjujući teoriju 'imprevizije', dozvoljava reviziju na području upravnih ugovora. Kasacioni sud u oblasti građansko- pravnih ugovora zasada odbija da dozvoli raskid ili izmenu osim kod ugovora o zakupu nepokretnosti. U francuskoj pravnoj doktrini razvila se živa diskusija o tome šta može predstavljati teorijsko-pravni osnov sudske intervencije u ugovor u slučaju nastupanja promenjenih okolnosti. Različita doktrinarna shvatanja o ovom pitanju povezana su nastojanjima da se u okviru moralnih i pravnih principa prihvaćenih u Građanskom zakoniku pronađe uporište za priznanje uticaja promenjenih okolnosti u francuskom pravu.

The French Civil Code does not provide for a general rule on rescission or amending a contract due to hardship (changed conditions) which disrupts the balance between mutual obligations in bilateral contracts. Judicial practice and a part of the literature hold that the lack of the general rule means that the French law does not allow for the rescission or amending (revision). The most conspicuous exception from the above standpoint concerning the immutability of contract is found at the practice of administrative litigation, where courts apply the theory of impossibility of anticipation and so in an indirect way permit the revision of contract. The practice of the Court of Cassation has departed from that principle for the time being only in the case of a contract of lease of immovables, where rescission is permitted on the erroneous application of the theory of the Act of God. There are several theories in French doctrine concerning the legal ground for rescission or revision of contract, namely: the theory of common intention, the one of changing the purpose of the contract, the theory of equity, the theory of good faith and honesty, the theory of subsequent lack of interest of society (i.e. benefit to it), and the one concerning equity in the contract. Their common aim is to find out a theoretical basis for the rule for rescission or revision (amending) of contract. The efforts of the doctrine have not been successful until now. However, it is possible to expect that in near future French law will find a model in some of mentioned theories for settling the problem of hardship (changed circumstances), as dictating the recognition of such fact. Another problem is the coordination of national laws of the states - members of the European Union, the more so as some of them already have the rule concerning the rescission or revision of contract due to hardship. In such a way the conditions will be unified in the sphere of business and trade for all subjects interested, which is particularly important for the unified market.