船舶建造合同的形式

船舶建造合同的形式 林源民 法律对合同形式的 法律针对特定合同了形式要求，这些形式要求在成文法中得到了确认。 法律规定特定合同形式要求的目的有以下四个方面：1 First, they may serve as clear evidence of a transaction and of its terms. Secondly, they may have a cautionary effect, thereby deterring hasty, premature or ill- considered contracts being made. Thirdly, they may have a “channelling” function, offering “a legal framework into which a party may fit his actions”. Thus, formalities may mark off transactions from one another and create a standardised form of transaction. Fourthly, formal requirements may be used as a device to protect the weaker parties to contracts. 成文法规定的特殊合同包括：可流通票据、消费者信用、雇佣以及保证等。 法律针对这些合同规定的形式要求各不相同，例如为期超过 3 年的租赁应当采 用契据的形式；2 即使采用面形式，不同的成文法也规定了不同的具体要求， 例如转让土地的合同应当采用书面的形式订立，或有书面的备忘录证明之；3 有 的成文法甚至规定了书面形式的具体要求。4 当事人实际订立的合同若不符合成 文法规定的形式则可能导致不同的后果，有的会使合同无效，例如：不符合法 定格式和措辞的卖据 (bill of sale) 就是无效的；5 有的则导致合同无法执行，例 如：当事人不能凭非书面形式的买卖土地或土地利益合同在法院提起诉讼；6 或 只能通过法院的命令才可以对债务人执行。7 货物买卖合同的形式 1979 年《货物买卖法》对货物买卖合同没有规定形式要求，货物买卖合同 可以采取书面方式订立，也可以采取口头方式订立，也可以部分采用书面部分 采用口头的方式订立，甚至还可以通过行为推定。该法的规定是：8 Subject to this and any other Act, a contract of sale may be made in writing (either with or without seal), or by word of mouth, or partly in writing and partly by word of mouth, or may be implied from the conduct of the parties. 虽然法律对货物买卖合同几乎没有形式上的要求，但除了日常生活中的买 卖活动，商业买卖通常采用书面的形式订立。 船舶建造合同的形式 1 Law of Property Act 1925 s.52. 2 Ibid. 3 Law of Property Act 1925 s.40. 4 Unsolicited Goods and Services (Amendment) Act 1975, s.1. 5 Bills of Sale Act (1878) Amendment Act 1882, s.9. 6 Law of Property Act 1925, s.40. 7 Consumer Credit Act 1974, s.65. 8 s.4(1). 虽然法律对形式没有要求，但在实践中以口头方式订立船舶建造合同的做 法应当是相当罕见的。几乎所有的船舶建造合同均采用双方签署正式合同文本 的方式定订立，但除非双方明确约定，签署合同并不当然成为合同成立的前提 条件。在Okura & Co Ltd v Navara Shipping Corporation SA9一案中，船厂和船东 于 1976年 9月 3日签署了船舶建造合同，由船厂为船东在广岛建造一艘 16,000 吨的船舶。船舶建造合同规定船厂应当在 1977年 9月交船，交船发生延迟时合 同价格将作出调整。但延迟超过 150 天的，船东则有权解除合同。结果船厂遭 遇了财务困难，导致交船延迟了。150天的期限于 1978年 2月 27日届满，第二 天船东便解除了船舶建造合同。双方接着开始在降低造价的基础上重新洽谈船 舶建造合同。5月 2日，船厂向船东发出了如下要约： (1) delivery date/time of vessel to be within 35 consecutive days from date of Navara’s declaration of acceptance of vessel ... (10) All other terms and conditions as contained in shipbuilding contract dated 3.9.76 to apply in full except article 6 item 4 (a) third line to read “within three days”. 5 月 3 日，船东回复船厂并提出了一个反要约，首先将 35 个连续日修改为 20个连续日（后来又调整至 25个连续日），其次将船厂的（10）改为： ... all other terms and conditions as contained in shipbuilding contract dated 3.9.76 to apply in full. 5月 4日，船厂回复称： Thanks for your telex and telephone call during holiday of 3-5-78. Before we go back to buyer on firm basis we would like to point out that delivery of vessel within 20 days from the date of buyer’s declaration of acceptance of vessel is found to be mathematically impossible.… Builder now intends commencing their work right after the declaration of buyer, thus leaving only 7 consecutive days to complete unfinished items.… Besides we have not received to date the list of unfinished items from buyer. We happen to have a copy of the list as composed by Mr. Marlas and addressed to Mr. Todani of Builder dated 27-2-78, 0335 hours. We do not believe that there is any other document in existence, but any event please confirm. Will call you to discuss at 1000 hours your time. 5月 4日晚上，船东又发电传给船厂： Confirming numerous telephonic exchanges sale confirmed basis buyers telex offer yesterday except clause 1, line 1 reads “25 days” instead of “20 days”. 5 月 8 日，船东又给船厂发了电传，包括未完成项目的清单。5 月 10 日， 船东将备忘录草稿寄给了船厂，该备忘录包括下列条款： (10) The parties hereto agree that there shall be no extension of time for delivery of the vessel due to force majeure and that the provisions of article 8 (1) of the contract shall not apply to this agreement. 5 月 18 日，船厂回复船东并要求船东删除该条款，但船东拒绝删除该条款， 9 [1982] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 537. 但洽谈继续在船东和船厂之间进行。到了 7 月，船舶已不再可能出售给船东了。 在 7 月底船厂退还了船东支付的预付款。船厂起诉，要求法院确认船厂和船东 在船东解除船舶建造合同后未达成任何协议。船东则主张双方已经于 5 月初达 成了协议，而船厂又违反了该协议。法院拒绝接受船厂认为双方没有达成最终 协议的观点，法院认为双方已经于 5月 4日达成了协议，但又认为 5月 4日达 成的协议是不可执行的。高院的Neill法官说：10 In my judgment the parties agreed all the essential terms on May 4 and a binding contract came into existence at that time. A written memorandum recording the terms was no doubt necessary for, among other things, the obtaining of Japanese government approval… The signing of the memorandum of agreement was not, however, a condition precedent to the formation of a binding contract. 案件上诉至上诉法院，上诉法院则认为在 5 月 4 日双方并没有成立有约束 力的协议。所有的一切都是暂定的，只有在签署协议后双方才受约束。因为 5 月 4 日的电传本身并没有约束力，此后双方签署的文件才具有约束力。而该文 件虽然已经起草，但从未获得双方的签署。上诉法院的Lord Denning说：11 The Judge held that there was a binding agreement. I do not agree with him. Everything was provisional only. The parties were not to be bound unless and until they signed an agreement. Item 3 of the telex said, “within 15 consecutive days after signing of this agreement”. Article XIX of the original contract said that it would become effective when the agreement was signed. Item 11 of the telex clearly contemplated that there should be a memorandum of agreement in mutually acceptable terms. It is a matter simply of the construction of the document. The telex itself was not binding. It was a preliminary to a future document which was to be binding when signed. The future document was drafted but it was never signed. It was never agreed by the parties. 以合同为准 在不少情况下，洽谈合同的双方会约定双方的洽谈以合同为准 (subject to contract)。在有此种约定时，即使双方实际上已经就合同的主要条款达成了一致， 双方之间的合同也只有在正式合同签署后才真正生效。在正式合同签署之前， 双方协议是不完整的 (incomplete agreement)。在Kingston-upon-Hull (Governors) v Petch12一案中，原告的招标书中有如下内容： P.S. – All contractors will have to sign a written contract after acceptance of tender. 被告投了标，原告接受了被告的投标并通知了被告。但当天被告写信告诉 原告不打算提供其已在标书中承诺的物品。法院需要解决的问是原告和被告 之间是否存在有约束力的合同。被告认为自己的投标只是一个建议而已，因此 自己可以撤销该建议。但原告则认为合同已经成立，被告应当受约束。就原告 是否可以获得赔偿的问题，财税法庭的Parker法官认为：13 The defendant is entitled to judgment. It was clearly the intention of the parties 10 [1981] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 561 at 567. 11 [1982] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 537 at 541. 12 (1854) 10 Ex 610. 13 (1854) 10 Ex 610 at 613. that there should be no binding engagement until a written contract had been executed. The tender, though accepted, was not a contract. 在Confetti Records v Warner Music UK一案中，衡平法院的Lewison法官对 “subject to contract”作出了解释，他说：14 In my judgment, the words “subject to contract”, at least in the field of land law, do have a definite and ascertained legal meaning. They are relied on everyday to prevent contracts coming into existence … although the phrase may have originated in the context of sales and leases of land, it has a more general application in commerce generally. In the ordinary way, once negotiations have begun “subject to contract” that label governs all subsequent communications between the parties unless the label is expunged by express agreement or necessary implication. 在Christie, Owen and Davies Ltd v Stockton15一案中，原告是代理，被告是业 主。业主委托代理出售其房产和业务： Please offer by private treaty the within described premises and business. I approve and confirm your commission and terms as printed below. 代理的佣金合同规定： Christie & Co.’s commission is payable by the owner in respect of any completed transaction pertaining to the within described premises or to such other premises belonging to the owner which may be subsequently sold to their applicant. Should the owner withdraw after having accepted an offer to purchase by a person able and willing to enter into a formal contract then [the agents] shall be paid their commission. 代理为业主介绍一个潜在的买家，业主和买家在一次会议中约定，买家同 意购买业主的业务，但以合同为准。虽然双方没有使用“以合同为准”的字眼， 但双方的一致约定是要约和接受均以合同为准。当天业主电话告诉代理已经同 意向该潜在买家出售业务。接着业主和潜在买家的律师开始洽谈合同条款，并 就此达成了一致。但是业主的律师却通知潜在买家的律师说： Our client instructs us he is not proposing to proceed with the proposed sale to your client and asking for the return of the documents. 这时潜在买家虽然已经签署了合同，但并未和业主进行交换。原告要求被 告支付佣金。法院认为代理要获得佣金就必须证明业主已经订立了合同，该合 同虽然是有效的，但由于没有做成书面的，因此无法执行。王座法院的Slade法 官指出：16 Therefore, quite apart from other considerations, I should hold the word “offer,” in the agency contract that I have to consider, to mean “an offer capable of being turned into a contract by acceptance.” Equally, I should regard the words “after having accepted an offer” as meaning “after that offer had been turned into a contract by acceptance,” albeit (there being no memorandum), an unenforceable 14 [2003] EWCH 1274, [66] & 100. 15 [1953] 1 WLR 1353. 16 [1953] 1 WLR 1353 at 1357. contract. 接着Slade法官对“以合同为准”作出了解释，他说：17 Where you have an agreement made subject to contract there are four possible outcomes of that so-called agreement. The first is a completed transaction; the second is a legally enforceable contract, but one which at the time that the agent issues his writ claiming commission, for example, has not yet actually proceeded to completion; the third one is a contract which is not legally enforceable; and the fourth one is a state of affairs which has never passed beyond the realm of negotiations… With regard to the fourth outcome, where nothing has proceeded beyond the stage of negotiation, it is, of course, open to a principal and agent to arrive at any agreement they choose, and many attempts have been made by highly reputable estate agents like the plaintiffs in the present case to hit on a form of phraseology which will prevent a person who has had the benefit of their services and has gone right up to the point of being about to put his pen to sign a contract, from either caprice or, more likely, because at the last moment he receives a better offer, discarding any moral obligation he may have incurred and merely resiling from the negotiations in order to get more money. 电子方式订立的合同 当前，越来越多的合同包括船舶建造合同都是由双方通过电子方式 – 最为 常见的是电子邮件，磋商、洽谈并订立的。电子方式的采用对传统的法定合同 形式及其认定带来了挑战。为了适应现代通讯方式，2000 年《电子通讯法》 (Electronic Communications Act 2000) 作出了如下规定：18 Subject to subsection (3), the appropriate Minister may by Power to modify order made by statutory instrument modify the provisions of (a) any enactment or subordinate legislation, or (b) any scheme, licence, authorisation or approval issued, granted or given by or under any enactment or subordinate legislation, in such manner as he may think fit for the purpose of authorising or facilitating the use of electronic communications or electronic storage (instead of other forms of communication or storage) for any purpose mentioned in subsection (2). 由此可见，政府可以通过修改立法、规定以及许可等其认为合适的方式允 许或方便电子通讯以及储存方式的采用。 17 [1953] 1 WLR 1353 at 1358. 18 s.8(1).