| Budget Amount *help |
¥2,600,000 (Direct Cost: ¥2,600,000)
Fiscal Year 1998: ¥600,000 (Direct Cost: ¥600,000)
Fiscal Year 1997: ¥2,000,000 (Direct Cost: ¥2,000,000)
|
|---|
| Research Abstract |
In a judicial precedent about the cases of modern trading like commodity futures trading or financial trading, we can find the resolution by tort law and the tort liability beside the solution by contract law. Also for the case of the multilevel marketing system, such view is widely accepted. A contract partner, in such cases, can claim for damages by tort law against another partner. However it is not clear, which relation between tort and contract law we should find. "What kind of role can and should tort law play in the cases between contract partners" is the theme of our collaborated research.
With our works we have arrived a conclusion, resolution by tort law has many problems to solve. In other words, we should use more positively contract law or law of restitution as means to the better solution at the characteristic and the concrete situation of each contract. First, in the commodity futures trading cases, we can regard the concrete inducement to such a trading and the breach of each directions as the breach of basic trading contract. An appropriate solution for many cases can be attained not by tort law, but by contract law. Second, in the cases of multilevel marketing system, we find the' core of the issue in its character against "public order". In such cases, it is not easy to regard a contract partner as a victim in the light of tort law. We, however, can and should declare such a trading system invalid because of its violation of public order. Then we can find a much more suitable resolution in the law of restitution. Third, about the cases of financial trading as risk trading, the contents of obligation of explanation, the negligence of which could lead to the tort liability, is not clear, In order to draw an unquestionable conclusion, the legislation is necessary.
|
