SPANISHFINALREPORT171.docx

SPANISHFINALREPORT171.docx

《SPANISHFINALREPORT171.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《SPANISHFINALREPORT171.docx（29页珍藏版）》请在冰点文库上搜索。

SPANISHFINALREPORT171

THESPANISH“CLÁUSULAREBUSSICSTANTIBUS”

TrentoCommonProject-UnexpectedCircumstancesGroup

Spanishreportby

OdaviaBuenoDíaz

（LL.M.Leuven）

Juniorresearcher-UniversityofAmsterdam

Dr.LuzM.MartínezVelencoso

（LL.M.Berlin）

UniversityofValencia

§1.SPANISHBACKGROUNDREGARDINGCHANGEOFCIRCUMSTANCES

SpanishCivillaw,duetotheimportanceofthepactasuntservandadoctrine（asitiscodifiedinarticle1091oftheSpanishCivilCode（hereinafterCC））,refusesgrantingreliefongroundsofhardship.NeverthelesstheSpanishtribunalshavedevelopedthedoctrineofthecláusularebussicstantibusthatallowsthepartywhoisundulyburdenedbecauseofchangedcircumstancestoobtainadischargeofthecontract,ortopursueincourttheadaptationofthecontracttothechangedcircumstances.

Otherwise,contrarytowhathappenedinGermanybeforetheinclusionof§313BGB,Spanishliteraturehasnotconsideredofagreatinteresttheremedyofthedoctrineofthecláusularebussicstantibusincaseofachangeofcircumstances.

BothSpanishcourtsandlegalliterature（inlinewiththepronouncementsofthejudiciary）havereferredtotheapplicationoftherebussicstantibusclauseastheonlyremedytocorrecttheimbalancecausedbyachangeofcircumstancesincontracts.Theclauseimpliesunderstandingthatineverycontractexistsatacitagreement,byvirtueofwhichthefulfilmentofthecontractisonlycompulsorywhenthingsstaythesameastheywereatthemomentthecontractwasconcluded（contractusquehabenttractumsuccesivumveldependentiamdefuturorebussicstantibus）.However,theTShasalsoapproachedthecasesofextraordinaryalterationofthecircumstancesinconformitywithotherdoctrinessuchasthedoctrineoftheexcessiveonerosity（STS23-04-1991,RJ1991,3023）orthedoctrineofthedisappearanceofthebasisofthecontract（STS15-03-1994,RJ1994,1784）.Initsjudgementof6-10-1987（RJ1987,6720）,theTSexpresslystatesthat“allofthesedoctrinesserveasawayofre-establishingthereciprocitybetweentheinterestsofthepartiesinthecontract”.However,thedoctrineoftherebusclauseisthemostimportantone.

Asitwasalreadysaid,thestartingpointwhentheSpanishcourtsdealwithcasesofunforeseeablechangesofcircumstancesistherespectfortheaxiompactasuntservanda.Theonlyjustificationlegallyrecognisedwhichmaycontravenethisaxiomisthecaseofimpossibilitytoperform（articles1182ffCC）.

Howeverwefindcontractswhereperformanceforoneofthepartiesbecomesextraordinarilyburdensomeasaresultofanunforeseenalterationofthecircumstances.HowhastheSpanishjudiciaryreactedwhentacklingthosecases?

TheTShasestablishedthatonlyinsuchsituations,somecorrectingmechanismshavetobeappliedtotakethingstotheiroriginalstatus,byrevisingthecontract.InthewordsoftheTS“courtstrytosolvetheproblembyhumanisingthejudgement,andthusmitigatingthejuridicalformalism”.

Manygroundsofjustificationhavebeenarticulatedtodefendtheuseoftherebusclausedespiteitisopposedtotheprincipleofsanctityofcontracts.

Someauthorsarguethattheclauseexistsineverycontractbecauseofthepresumedwilloftheparties（subjectiveexplanation）.Manyothershavecriticizedthisapproachandhavetriedtogiveanobjectivejustificationfortheuseoftheclause.ProfessorLasartesupportsthatthisremedyisjustaconcreteapplicationofthegeneralruleestablishedbyarticle1258oftheSpanishCC（“integrationrule”）.Thismeansthatthegroundofjustificationisnotbasedonthewilloftheparties,butontheprincipleofgoodfaith.Otherauthors,likePerezGonzálezandAlguerexplainthatarticle1258CCallowstheinterpretationofthearticlesthatestablishtheprincipleofthesanctityofcontractsinawaycompatiblewiththerequirementsofjusticeandequity.TheSpanishauthorArechederrasupportsthisapproach.Hehaswrittenthatthedoctrineoftheclauseissituatedatthemarginandnotagainstthejuridicalprinciplesandthecontractualtechnicalsystem.TheTShasalsotriedtogiveobjectivejustificationsinapplyingtheremedyoftheclause.Initsjudgementof28-01-1970（RJ1970,324）,theCourtaffirmsthattheclauseisnotcontrarytotheprincipleofsanctityofcontracts.However,inotherjudgementstheCourtstatesjusttheopposite.TheTSdecisionsof9-07-1984（RJ1984,4084）and23-03-1988（RJ1988,2228）allowtheuseoftheclause.Inthefirstcase,itwasruledthatanadministrativeresolutionmodifyingthesanitaryregimeofslaughterhouseswasconstitutiveofanextraordinaryvariationofthecircumstancesthatresultedinanexorbitantdisproportionbetweenthemutualobligationsofthecontractingparties.InthesecondcasetheCourtstatedthatthesituationofsuspensionofpaymentsofoneofthecontractingpartiesfulfilledalltherequirementstoapplytheremedy.

AlltheseattemptstojustifytheuseoftheclauseseemnottobeenoughfortheTStoacceptthegeneralapplicationoftheclause.Theprincipleofsanctityofcontractsprevailsovertheneedtoadequatethecontracttothedemandsofequity.ThefeelingoftheTSand,ingeneral,oftheSpanishcontractuallegalsystemtowardstheapplicationoftherebussicstantibusclauseismadeobviousinafamousstatementoftheTS:

“itsapplicationisadangerouspractice”.

Theconditionsstatedbythecourtsfortheapplicationofthedoctrineoftherebussicstantibusclausearestrict:

1.Thecontractinvolvedmustbealong-termcontractoracontractinwhichnoneoftheobligationshaveyetbeenperformedorwhereoneofthepartieshasperformedbuttheotherhasnot.

2.Theremustbeanalterationofthebasisofthecontract.Itispossiblewhen:

a）thecontracthasbecomeexcessivelyburdensomeforoneoftheparties;b）thepurposeofthecontractistotallyfrustrated.

3.Thechangeofcircumstancesmustbeextraordinaryandunforeseen.Neitherofthepartiescouldreasonablyhavetakentheimpedimentintoaccountatthetimeoftheconclusionofthecontract.

4.Neitherofthepartiesshouldtaketheriskofthechangeofcircumstances（asacontractualobligation）.Thedoctrineofthecláusularebussicstantibuswouldnotbeapplicabletoaleatorycontracts.

5.Thepersoninvokingthechangeofcircumstancesshouldnotbeaccountableforitaccordingtothecontractorcommonopinion.

Theeffectsoftheapplicationofthedoctrineoftherebusclausemaybetwo-fold:

a）therevisionofthecontracttorestoreitsequilibrium;b）theterminationofthecontract.However,courtsprefertherevisionofthecontract.

Thereareagreatnumberofdecisionsthat“obiterdictum”recognisethepossibilityofadaptationorterminationthecontractongroundsofthedoctrineofthecláusularebussicstantibus,butitisonlyappliedasareasonforthedecisionofthecaseinfewjudgementsoftheTS.

Inmostjudgementswheretheexistenceofanextraordinaryalterationofthecircumstanceshasbeenestablished,theTShasconsideredthattherequirementstoapplytheclausearenotfulfilled.Forexample,inthejudgementof4-02-1995（RJ1995,739）,theplaintifffiledarequesttodecreasethesupporthewaspayingtohisex-wife.Hearguedthathislivingstandardshaddeterioratedcomparedtothesituationatthetimetheseparationcontractwasmadeandthatthisconstitutedanextraordinaryalterationofthecircumstancesthatjustifiedtherevisionoftheoriginalseparationagreement.Inconsideringhispersonallifestyle,theTSfoundnoproofofchange.Theclaimanthadkepthishighstandardoflivingcomparedtothesituationatthetimethecontractwasconcluded.Therequestwasturneddownsincethefirstrequirementwasnotfulfilled.

Initsdecisionof17-05-1986（RJ1986,2725）theTShadtoruleonalandlord-tenantcase.Thetenantranacafé-restaurant.Helostmostofhisclienteleduetoaroadreconstruction.Thetenantdecidedtoclosedowntherestaurantandhadrandomopeninghoursforthecafé.Thelandlordconsideredthistobeadeviationofthecontractandsuedtoevict.Thetenantarguedanextraordinaryalterationofthecircumstancesasaresultofthelossofclientsduetoanexternalcause,thatis,theroadreconstruction.TheTSdisagreedsincethereconstructionactivitieswereknowntothetenantatthetimetheleasewasconcludedandhenceitcouldnotbeconsideredasanextraordinaryandunforeseeablealterationofthecircumstances.

ThisfeartoapplytheclausehaslikelycausedtheSpanishlegislatornottocodifytheremedy.WecannotfindaspecificreferenceintheCC.Initsjudgementof31-10-1963（RJ1963,2120）theTSpointedoutthattherebusclausewasnotcodifiedintheSpanishCCbecauseitwascontrarytothespiritoftheCivilnorm.Theapplicationoftheremedyiscontratenoremrationisandthisiswhyithastobeexceptionalandrestrictive.

HoweveritcannotbeconcludedthatthereisacompletelackofcodificationoftheremedyincasesofchangeofcircumstancesunderSpanishCivilLaw:

1.-Althoughitisnotapplicableatanationallevel,theCivilCodefromNavarra,oneoftheseveralcivilRegionalsystemsthatco-existsinSpainwiththeNationalCivilsystem,hascodifiedaremedytobeappliedincaseofanalterationofthecircumstancesthataffectstheeconomicalcontentofthecontractandthatbreaksthereciprocitybetweenthemutualobligations.Article493（3）statesthattheaggrievedpartymayinstituteproceedingstoclaimtherevisionofthecontractinordertoadaptittothedemandsofequityortoclaimtermination.

2.-ThereareseveralprovisionsintheCCwhichregulatecaseswhereavariat