新加坡合同法（中英文对照）

THE LAW OF CONTRACT OF SINGAPORE

新加坡合同法（中英文对照）

学术交流请私信或评论留言

TABLE OF CONTENTS 目录

SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION 导论

SECTION 2 OFFER AND ACCEPTANCE

要约和承诺

SECTION 3 CONSIDERATION 对价

SECTION 4 INTENTION TO CREATE LEGAL RELATIONS

设立法律关系的意旨

SECTION 5 TERMS OF THE CONTRACT

合同条款

SECTION 6 CAPACITY TO CONTRACT

缔约能力

SECTION 7 PRIVITY OF CONTRACT

合同的相对性

SECTION 8 DISCHARGE OF CONTRACT

合同之解除

SECTION 9 MISTAKE误解

SECTION 10 MISREPRESENTATION

虚假陈述

SECTION 11 DURESS, UNDUE INFLUENCE & UNCONSCIONABILITY

胁迫、不正当影响和不合情理的行为

SECTION 12 ILLEGALITY AND PUBLIC POLICY

非法性与公共政策

SECTION 13 JUDICIAL REMEDIES FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT

违约的司法救济

部分章节示例如下：

1.1 Contract law in Singapore is largely based on the common law of contract in England. Unlike its neighbours Malaysia and Brunei, following Independence in 1965, Singapore´s Parliament made no attempt to codify Singapore´s law of contract. Accordingly, much of the law of contract in Singapore remains in the form of judge-made rules. In some circumstances, these judge-made rules have been modified by specific statutes.

新加坡的合同法基本上是以英国关于合同的普通法为范式而构建的。与它的邻居马来西亚和文莱不同的是，新加坡在1965年独立之后并没有试图编纂新加坡的合同法，因此新加坡的合同法仍保持判例法规则的模式。在某些情况下，判例法的规则已经被特定的成文法所修改。

SECTION 2 OFFER AND ACCEPTANCE要约和承诺

Agreement协议

2.1 A contract is essentially an agreement between two or more parties, the terms of which affect their respective rights and obligations which are enforceable at law. Whether the parties have reached agreement, or a meeting of the minds, is objectively ascertained from the facts. The concepts of offer and acceptance provide in many, albeit not all, cases the starting point for analysing whether agreement has been reached.

合同在本质上是双方或者多方之间的协议，该协议条款涉及到当事人各自的权利义务并且具有法律约束力。至于当事人之间是否达成协议，或合意（consensus ad idem）, 应通过对事实的客观分析而确定。在大多数–但并非所有的情况下，要约与承诺的概念是分析当事人是否达成协议的起点。

Offer要约

2.2 An offer is a promise, or other expression of willingness, by the `offeror´ to be bound on certain specified terms upon the unqualified acceptance of these terms by the person to whom the offer is made (the `offeree´). Provided the other formation elements (ie consideration and intention to create legal relations) are present, the acceptance of an offer results in a valid contract.

一个要约即是“要约人”发出的一项允诺或其他形式的自愿意思表示，表明经“受要约人”无条件承诺某些确定的条款，“要约人”即受这些条款的约束。如合同成立的其他要素亦得满足（如对价和设立法律关系的意旨），对要约的承诺会导致一个有效的合同。

2.3 Whether any particular statement amounts to an offer depends on the intention with which it is made. An offer must be made with the intention to be bound. On the other hand, if a person is merely soliciting offers or requesting for information, without any intention to be bound, at best, he or she would be making an invitation to treat. Under the objective test, a person may be said to have made an offer if his or her statement (or conduct) induces a reasonable person to believe that the person making the offer intends to be bound by the acceptance of the alleged offer, even if that person in fact had no such intention.

一个特定的表述是否构成要约有赖于表述的意旨。要约必须具有受拘束的意旨。如果某人只是引诱他人作出要约，或者只是询问情况，而并没有受拘束的意旨，那他或她最多只是在作出要约邀请。按照客观标准，如果某人的表述（或者行为）致使一个通情达理的人相信发出要约者具有在该要约被承诺后接受拘束的意旨，则即使该人实际上没有此种意旨，他也被认为是发出了一项要约。

Acceptance承诺

2.5 An offer is accepted by the unconditional and unqualified assent to its terms by the offeree. This assent may be expressed through words or conduct, but cannot be inferred from mere silence save in very exceptional circumstances.

受要约人对要约条款无条件和无保留的同意构成对要约的承诺。同意可由言语或行为来表示，但除非在极其例外的情况下，缄默不能被认为是同意。

2.6 As a general rule, acceptance must be communicated to the offeror, although a limited exception exists where the acceptance is sent by post and this method of communication is either expressly or impliedly authorised. This exception, known as the `postal acceptance rule´, stipulates that acceptance takes place at the point when the letter of acceptance is posted, whether or not it was in fact received by the offeror.

一个总的原则是承诺应该被通知到要约人，但如果承诺是通过邮寄方式且此种方式被认为是或者明确或者默示地许可的，则构成一项例外。这个例外被称为“投邮承诺规则”，它规定承诺信一经付邮，无论要约人是否实际上收到，承诺均告生效。

Certainty确定性

2.7 Before the agreement may be enforced as a contract, its terms must be sufficiently certain. At the least, the essential terms of the agreement should be specified. Beyond this, the courts may resolve apparent vagueness or uncertainty by reference to the acts of the parties, a previous course of dealing between the parties, trade practice or to a standard of reasonableness. On occasion, statutory provision of contractual details may fill the gaps. For more on implication of terms, see Paragraphs 5.5 to 5.8 below.

在协议被作为合同执行以前，它的条款必须足够确定。至少，协议的关键条款应予明确规定。在此之外，法庭可以通过诉诸当事方的行为、当事方之间已有的习惯作法、贸易惯例或者合理标准来解决协议条款含糊不清或不确定的问题。某些情况下，关于合同细节的成文法规定也可以用来填补协议条款的空白。关于条款的问题，可进一步参见第5.5节和5.8节。

Completeness完整性

2.8 An incomplete agreement also cannot amount to an enforceable contract. Agreements made `subject to contract´ may be considered incomplete if the intention of the parties, as determined from the facts, was not to be legally bound until the execution of a formal document or until further agreement is reached.

不完整的协议不能构成具有执行力的合同。如果协议规定“以合同为准”，且由事实可推断出的当事方的意旨表明在正式合同或者进一步的协议达成之前，当事方无意受到法律拘束，则该协议为不完整的协议。

SECTION 4 INTENTION TO CREATE LEGAL RELATIONS设立法律关系的意旨

Contractual Intention合同意旨

4.1 In the absence of contractual intention, an agreement, even if supported by consideration, cannot be enforced. Whether the parties to an agreement intended to create legally binding relations between them is a question determined by an objective assessment of the relevant facts.

如缺乏合同意旨，一个协议即使有对价支持，也不能被执行。协议的各当事方是否意图在彼此之间建立有法律约束力的关系应该通过对相关事实的客观评估而确定。

Commercial Arrangements商业安排

4.2 In the case of agreements in a commercial context, the courts will generally presume that the parties intended to be legally bound. However, the presumption can be displaced where the parties expressly declare the contrary intention. This is often done through the use of honour clauses, letters of intent, memoranda of understanding and other similar devices, although the ultimate conclusion would depend, not on the label attached to the document, but on an objective assessment of the language used and on all the attendant facts.

对商业情境中达成的协议，法庭一般都会推定当事人具有受法律约束力的意旨。然而这个推定可以被当事人明确宣示的相反意图所推翻。君子协定、意向书、备忘录和其他类似手段都可以表现这种意图。尽管如此，关于[当事人意图的] 最终结论仍有赖于对他们所用的语言和所有相关事实的客观评估，而不是文件的标签。

SECTION 6 CAPACITY TO CONTRACT缔约能力

Minors未成年人

6.1 Under Singapore common law, a minor is a person under the age of 21. The validity of contracts entered into by minors is governed by the common law, as modified by the Minors´ Contracts Act (Cap 389, 1994 Rev Ed).

依新加坡的普通法，21岁以下为未成年人。根据修订后的《未成年人合同法》（Cap 389, 1994年修订）未成年人订立的合同由普通法管辖。

SECTION 9 MISTAKE误解

Introduction简介

9.1 If one or both parties enter into a contract under a misapprehension of its basis, or of an important aspect of the transaction, the contract may either be completely void, or voidable. In the latter case, the contract is valid until it is rescinded (or set aside) by the mistaken party. This distinction is critical for determining third party rights – seeParagraph 9.12 below. Whether a mistake has the effect of rendering a contract void or voidable depends on the manner in which the mistake arises.

如果一方或双方当时订立合同是基于对合同基础或者对交易一个重大方面的误解，则合同或者是完全无效，或者是可撤销的。如为可撤销情形，合同在被受误解影响一方撤销以前仍为有效。这个区别对确定第三方的权利至关重要。见下文第9.12节。一个误解是否能导致合同无效或可撤销要根据误解产生的情形来判断。

Mutual Mistake相互误解

9.2 If A contracts with B believing that he is purchasing X but B is in fact intending to sell Y to A, there is no contract between A and B because they have failed to reach any agreement on the subject matter of the contract. Mistakes of this nature are commonly referred to as `mutual mistakes´. A `contract´ entered into under a mutual mistake (relating to a fundamental aspect of the contract) is void.

如果A与B订立合同，A确信他是购买甲物，而B事实上是打算售乙物予B，则在A和B之间不存在合同，因为他们对合同的标的物没有达成协议。此种性质的误解一般称为“相互误解”。相互误解（关系到合同的一个根本方面）之下订立的合同为无效合同。

Common Mistake共同误解

9.3 A `common mistake´ arises when an agreement is reached on the basis of a mistaken assumption or belief shared by both parties. This occurs, for instance, when A contracts to sell a consignment of goods to B but unknown to both parties, the goods had been destroyed by the time the contract was formed. In this situation, owing to the destruction or non-existence of the subject matter, the contract may justifiably be regarded as invalid and void even though it is otherwise properly formed.

“共同误解”产生的情形是协议的达成是基于双方均有的误解假设或信念。比如，当A与B签订合同出售一票在途货物与B，为双方所均不知晓的是，货物在上述合同订立前已经被毁灭。这种情况下，鉴于标的物已经灭失或不存在，合同就可被正当地认为是无效的，尽管若非如此该合同原可以被恰当履行。

Undue Influence不当影响

11.4 The doctrine of undue influence guards against the victimisation of persons by those who exercise dominance or influence over them. The pressure so exerted is generally less direct and acute than that which occurs in cases involving duress. Traditionally, cases involving undue influence fall into two main categories.

不当影响理论保护那些因能支配或影响他们的人而受害的人。与胁迫相比，这一类的影响总的来说比较不直接不严重。传统上，不当影响的情形可以分为两类。

Actual Undue Influence实际的不当影响

11.5 Under the first category, a contract may be set aside if one utilises one´s dominant position over another to procure the latter´s consent to the contract. The victim has the burden of proving that the guilty party so dominates the victim´s will as to substantially undermine the victim´s independence of mind. It is, however, unnecessary to establish that such dominance arises out of a special relationship between the parties, nor that the resulting transaction is manifestly unfair to the victim.

第一类的情况是，如果一方利用自己对另一方的支配地位取得了对方对订立合同的同意，这个合同可以被终止。受害者需证明有过错的那方对受害者的意愿有支配性影响以致能实质上削弱受害者的独立意志。但是没有必要证明这种支配是出于一种特殊关系，或者该交易对受害者来说明显地不公平。

SECTION 12 ILLEGALITY AND PUBLIC POLICY非法性与公共政策

Statutory Illegality成文法上的非法性

12.1 A contract may be said to be `illegal´ in a number of different contexts. For example, there may be a statutory prohibition as to the formation of contracts which would entail carrying out certain socially undesirable activities.

在若干情形下一个合同可被称之为“非法”。例如，成文法可能禁止那些涉及到不良社会后果的合同成立。

12.2 In such cases, the statute may clearly provide that the `illegal´ contract is void. That is to say, it is to be treated in law as if it had never been formed. If the statutory wording is clear, there is no need to go any further to ascertain the intention of the legislature as to the status of the contract.

这种情形之下，成文法可能清楚规定“非法”合同是无效合同。这即是说，它被法律认为自始不成立。如果成文法的语言清楚，则没有必要进一步确定立法者关于合同地位的意图。见Turquand, Young & Co v Yat Yuen Hong Co Ltd [1967]1 MLJ 291 at 292。

12.3 Difficulties arise, however, where the statutory wording is unclear, particularly where the statute in question does not clearly specify whether its object is to prohibit the formation of the contract, or the performance of the obligations under that contract. The true parliamentary intention underlying the statutory prohibition will have to be ascertained. In the former case, the contract is void.

当立法语言不够清楚时问题就有点困难了，特别是当有关的成文法没有明确规定其目的到底是禁止合同成立，还是合同义务的履行。对此要确定议会在立法的禁止性规范的之下的真实意图。如果意图是前者，合同无效。