Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Sources of Consumer Contract Law

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
A Comparative Analysis of Policing Consumer Contracts in China and the EU

  • 453 Accesses

Abstract

Many types of rules can influence the behaviour of a trader who is dealing with a consumer. Within all these rules, some are binding because they are legislated in statutes or decided in precedents. The legitimacy of these rules usually derives from the institutions that enact them. In most cases, if the trader does not obey these rules, the consumer may go to the court or other public institutions for enforcement. These rules are usually qualified as ‘legal rules’. However, it is noteworthy that the answer to ‘who creates legal rules’ is rather different in diverse jurisdictions. For instance, in civil law countries the rules contained in the statutory law are relatively more important, while in common law countries, case law plays a more significant role. In contrast, some other rules are self-regulated, and traders follow them only because they are willing to attract consumers by providing a higher level of protection. In this category, some of the rules can also be relied upon by consumers because they are explicitly recorded in the contract.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The Constitution in this study refers to the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China (2004 Amendment) (《中华人民共和国宪法(2004修正)》).

  2. 2.

    National People’s Congress of the People’s Republic of China (中华人民共和国全国人民代表大会).

  3. 3.

    State Council of the People’s Republic of China (中华人民共和国国务院).

  4. 4.

    Supreme People’s Court of the People’s Republic of China (中华人民共和国最高人民法院).

  5. 5.

    Communist Party of China (中国共产党).

  6. 6.

    The original Chinese text is: ‘然考其师友渊源所渐,犹未及乎游、夏,而曰管、晏及,伊、吕不加,过矣。’ See Biography of Dong Zhong-shu, in History of the Han Dynasty (《汉书·董仲舒传赞》). The content of this ancient book is about the history of China from 202 B.C. to 23 A.D. and it was finished at about 109 A.D.

  7. 7.

    The concept of ‘quanli’ (‘权利’, the Chinese translation of ‘right’) is a good example. For more examples, see Qu (屈文生) 2012.

  8. 8.

    See Zhang (张文显) 2011, p. 52.

  9. 9.

    Article 1 of Taiwan Civil Code states: ‘If there is no applicable act for a civil case, the case shall be decided according to customs. If there is no such custom, the case shall be decided according to the jurisprudence’. Translated by www.lawbank.com.tw, available at: <http://db.lawbank.com.tw/Eng/FLAW/FLAWDAT0201.asp>, last visited: 2012/11/11.

  10. 10.

    See Zuo Zhuan, noted by Du Yu (《左传·昭公六年》,杜预注) .

  11. 11.

    See Shen (沈宗灵) 2004, p. 310.

  12. 12.

    The original Chinese text is: ‘我们认为,法的形成过程总是基于某种动因和进路,选择和提炼一定的资源,以实现权力和权利的制度性配置的过程。这种使法得以形成的资源、进路和动因,就是法的渊源。’ Zhang (张文显) 2007, p. 89.

  13. 13.

    See Zhang (张文显) 2007, pp. 92–94.

  14. 14.

    See Zhang (张文显) 2011, p. 53.

  15. 15.

    See Zhang (张文显) 2011, pp. 56–58.

  16. 16.

    See Li and Liu (李龙、刘诚) 2005, p. 4.

  17. 17.

    See Li and Liu (李龙、刘诚) 2005, pp. 4–6.

  18. 18.

    General Principles of the Civil Law of the People’s Republic of China (《中华人民共和国民法通则》).

  19. 19.

    See Liu (刘凯湘) 2008, p. 32. Article 6 of the General Principles of the Civil Law 1987 reads: ‘Civil activities must be in compliance with the law; where there are no relevant provisions in the law, they shall be in compliance with state policies’.

  20. 20.

    See Liu (刘凯湘) 2008, p. 35.

  21. 21.

    See Wang et al. (王利明等) 2011, p. 17.

  22. 22.

    See Han (韩世远) 2011, p. 16.

  23. 23.

    See Han (韩世远) 2011, pp. 16–21.

  24. 24.

    In some cases, there is one more level which can be seen as ‘the broadest one’. To this layer, not only the rules of positive law but also the ones of customary law or even natural law can be recognised as law.

  25. 25.

    Legislation Law of the People’s Republic of China (2015 Amendment) (《中华人民共和国立法法(2015修正)》).

  26. 26.

    This is further discussed in Sect. 2.2.2.3 of this chapter.

  27. 27.

    Article 7 of the Legislation Law 2015.

  28. 28.

    Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on Citation of Such Normative Legal Documents as Laws and Regulations in the Judgments (《最高人民法院关于裁判文书引用法律、法规等规范性法律文件的规定》), Interpretation No. 14 [2009] of the Supreme People’s Court (法释[2009]第14号).

  29. 29.

    See Article 1 of the Interpretation No. 14 [2009] of the Supreme People’s Court.

  30. 30.

    See Article 4 of the Interpretation No. 14 [2009] of the Supreme People’s Court. In comparison, the list containing legislation that can be cited in the field of criminal law is shorter: only statutes, legal interpretations or judicial interpretations are mentioned. In the field of administrative law, the list is longer: the interpretations of administrative regulations or administrative rules promulgated by the State Council or the departments authorised by the State Council can also be cited. See Articles 3 and 5 of the Interpretation No. 14 [2009] of the Supreme People’s Court.

  31. 31.

    For instance, it is argued that the rule regulated in the official documents made up by the departments of the State Council cannot be applied to decide whether a contract term violates the law (in which case it becomes void and null) or not. See Han (韩世远) 2015.

  32. 32.

    With regard to the analysis on regulatory documents, see Huang (黄金荣) 2014, p. 13.

  33. 33.

    See Han (韩世远) 2011, pp. 19–20.

  34. 34.

    It states: ‘If any international treaty concluded or acceded to by the People’s Republic of China contains provisions differing from those in the civil laws of the People’s Republic of China, the provisions of the international treaty shall apply, unless the provisions are ones on which the People’s Republic of China has announced reservations./International practice may be applied on matters for which neither the law of the People’s Republic of China nor any international treaty concluded or acceded to by the People’s Republic of China has any provisions’.

  35. 35.

    See Li and Liu (李龙、刘诚) 2005, p. 4.

  36. 36.

    For the facts and the judgment, see Yuling Qi v Xiaoqi Chen et al. See also, pkulaw.cn, ‘Dispute over Infringement of a Citizen’s Basic Right to Receive Education Protected by Constitution Through Infringement of Right of Name’, available at: en.pkulaw.cn, Reference Code of pkulaw.cn: CLI.C.66950(EN).

  37. 37.

    See the Official Reply of the Supreme People’s Court on Whether the Civil Liabilities Shall Be Borne for the Infringement upon a Citizen’s Basic Right of Receiving Education (《最高人民法院关于以侵犯姓名权的手段侵犯宪法保护的公民受教育的基本权利是否应承担民事责任的批复》), Interpretation No. 25 [2001] of the Supreme People’s Court (法释[2001]25号).

  38. 38.

    The aforementioned Interpretation No. 25 [2001] of the Supreme People’s Court lost its efficacy due to the Interpretation No. 15 [2008] of the Supreme People’s Court. See the Decision of the Supreme People’s Court on Abolishing the Relevant Judicial Interpretations (the Seventh Batch) Promulgated before the End of 2007 (《最高人民法院关于废止2007年底以前发布的有关司法解释(第七批)的决定》), Interpretation No. 15 [2008] of the Supreme People’s Court (法释[2008]15号).

  39. 39.

    Property Law of the People’s Republic of China (《中华人民共和国物权法》).

  40. 40.

    See Chen 2010, pp. 989–990. For the relevant news and comments, see Eva Cheng, ‘New Chinese property law protects robber barons’, available at: <http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/37269>, last visited: 2012/12/2.

  41. 41.

    For the recent discussion, see Wang (王书成) 2012; Liu (柳建龙) 2011.

  42. 42.

    For example, Article 14 of the Constitution states: ‘The State properly apportions accumulation and consumption, concerns itself with the interests of the collective and the individual as well as of the State…’

  43. 43.

    See Article 2 of the Legislation Law 2015.

  44. 44.

    See Article 7 of the Legislation Law 2015. Considering the language habit of legal English, the term of ‘law’ is substituted by the term of ‘statute’ hereinafter if it is not cited directly.

  45. 45.

    See Article 65 of the Legislation Law 2015.

  46. 46.

    See Article 72 of the Legislation Law 2015.

  47. 47.

    See Article 75 of the Legislation Law 2015.

  48. 48.

    The first consumer organisation was spontaneously set up by some retired veteran in Hebei province in 1983. They used the criminal law rules and some administrative regulations to protect their consumer rights. See Yang (杨琴) 2011, p. 25.

  49. 49.

    The Pharmaceutical Administration Law was first promulgated in 1984, and the latest amendment was published in 2015. See the Pharmaceutical Administration Law of the People’s Republic of China (2015 Amendment) (《中华人民共和国药品管理法(2015修正)》).

  50. 50.

    See the Standardization Law of the People’s Republic of China (《中华人民共和国标准化法》), which has come into force since 1989. Its Article 8 states: ‘The formulation of standards shall be conducive to ensuring safety and the people’s health, safeguarding consumer interests and protecting the environment’.

  51. 51.

    Law of the People’s Republic of China on the Protection of Consumer Rights and Interests (《中华人民共和国消费者权益保护法》).

  52. 52.

    It is noteworthy that judicial interpretations are not the only legal documents made by the Supreme People’s Court. The Supreme People’s Court also publishes official documents for other issues (e.g. management, daily operation, etc.) regarding the people’s court system. Different types of documents use different serial numbers. Judicial interpretations usually use ‘fashi’ (‘法释’, which means interpretations made by the Supreme People’s Court), while other official documents usually use ‘fafa’ (‘法发’, which means instruments published by the Supreme People’s Court) or simply ‘fa’ (‘法’, which refers to the Supreme People’s Court). However, this is not always the case, since in early years some judicial interpretations also used ‘fafa [year] No. xxx’ as their serial number. One good example is the Opinions of the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues concerning the Implementation of the General Principles of the Civil Law of the People’s Republic of China (For Trial Implementation). This document is no doubt a judicial interpretation, but its serial number is ‘fafa [1998] No. 6’. This study translates ‘fashi’ into ‘interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court’ and translates ‘fafa’ or ‘fa’ into ‘instrument of the Supreme Peoples’ Court’.

  53. 53.

    See Article 4 of the Interpretation No. 14 [2009] of the Supreme People’s Court. However, it is dubious why a judicial interpretation can regulate that judicial interpretations should be cited. According to Shiyuan Han, this seems a kind of ‘self-coronation’(‘自我加封’). See Han (韩世远) 2011, p. 17.

  54. 54.

    In the Notice of the Supreme People’s Court on Issuing the Guiding Opinion of the Supreme People’s Court on Carrying out the Case Quality Evaluation Work (for Trial Implementation) (《最高人民法院印发〈最高人民法院关于开展案件质量评估工作的指导意见(试行)〉的通知》) (Instrument No.6 [2008] of the Supreme People’s Court (法发[2008]6号)), the quality of trial work is supposed to be assessed in three aspects: justice, efficiency and effects. Its Article 8 firstly points out the ‘ratio of cases whose first judgment is changed in appeal’ is an important index to evaluate the quality of trial work from the perspective of justice. It reads: ‘The index of justice in trial work is composed of 11 grade III indices, namely, ratio of cases the jurisdiction over which is changed, ratio of cases under trial by jury in the first instance, ratio of cases whose first judgment is changed in appeal, ratio of cases remanded by the appeal court to the court of the first instance for new trial, ratio of cases whose effective judgment is changed, ratio of effective cases remanded for new trial, ratio of cases subject to the second instance, ratio of cases with discontinuation or termination of enforcement, ratio of cases under illegal trial, ratio of cases under illegal enforcement, and ruling paper quality index’. Furthermore, Article 10 of the Instrument No. 6 [2008] of the Supreme People’s Court mentions that the ratio of appeal cases is the first criterion to assess the effect in trial work. It reads: ‘The index of effects in trial work is composed of 11 grade III indices, namely, ratio of appeal cases, ratio of petition cases, ratio of cases concluded through mediation, ratio of cases withdrawn, ratio of complaints by letters and visits, ratio of repeated complaints by letters and visits, ratio of cases actually enforced, ratio of cases whose execution objects are realised, ratio of cases whose judgment is voluntarily executed, ratio of cases whose complaints are settled by the first judgment, and index of public satisfaction level’.

  55. 55.

    Besides the opinions that regard judicial interpretations as legal sources, there is another opinion which suggest that judicial interpretations should be considered as customary law as one of the informal sources so as to be cited by judges legally. See Cao (曹士兵) 2006, pp. 178–181.

  56. 56.

    See Hu and Yu (胡云腾、于同志) 2008, p. 3.

  57. 57.

    See Shen (沈宗灵) 2004, p. 321.

  58. 58.

    See Zhang (张文显) 2011, p. 53.

  59. 59.

    See Hu and Yu (胡云腾、于同志) 2008, p. 7. It is pointed out the fundamental difference between the Chinese Case Guidance System and the case law system of common law countries is that it only has the effect of guidance but not binding force.

  60. 60.

    See Article 9 of the Detailed Rules for the Implementation of the Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on Case Guidance (《〈最高人民法院关于案例指导工作的规定〉实施细则》), Instrument No. 130 [2015] of the Supreme People’s Court (法[2015]130号).

  61. 61.

    See Chen Kui, ‘How to Apply the Guiding Cases of the Supreme People’s Court in Judicial Practice’, China Guiding Cases Project, 22 April 2012, available at: <https://cgc.law.stanford.edu/commentaries/3-judge-chen>, last visited: 2016/10/20.

  62. 62.

    In an interview, the judge who is in charge of the Chinese Case Guidance System gives several differences between guiding cases and the cases published before, which can be elaborated in three aspects: (1) name, only the cases published through the procedure regulated by ‘the Provisions’ can be named ‘guiding cases’; (2) procedure, guiding cases have to be selected through the strict procedure which is explicit in ‘the Provisions’; and (3) effect, the judges should refer to guiding cases and they could cite them while the other cases should not be cited. See The Supreme People’s Court of the People’s Republic of China (中华人民共和国最高人民法院), ‘The Director of the Research Office of the Supreme People’s Court Meets the Press on the Case Guidance System’ (《最高人民法院研究室负责人就案例指导制度答记者问》), available at: <http://www.court.gov.cn/xwzx/jdjd/sdjd/201112/t20111220_168539.htm>, last visited: 2013/2/15.

  63. 63.

    See Article 7 of Notice of the Supreme People’s Court on Issuing the Provisions on Case Guidance (《最高人民法院印发〈关于案例指导工作的规定〉的通知》) (Instrument No. 51 [2010] of the Supreme People’s Court (法发[2010]51号)). It reads: ‘When trying similar cases, people’s courts at all levels shall use the guiding cases issued by the Supreme People’s Court as a reference’.

  64. 64.

    There is a heated debate on how to understand the phrase ‘yingdang canzhao’. See, for example, Lei (雷磊) 2015, p. 273.

  65. 65.

    See Article 10 of the Instrument No. 130 [2015] of the Supreme People’s Court.

  66. 66.

    See Article 2 of the Instrument No. 51 [2010] of the Supreme People’s Court. Its point (5) mentions that other cases that have a guiding function can also become guiding cases.

  67. 67.

    See Article 3 of the Instrument No. 51 [2010] of the Supreme People’s Court.

  68. 68.

    See Article 5 of the Instrument No. 51 [2010] of the Supreme People’s Court.

  69. 69.

    For the English translation of the first ten batches of guiding cases, see Stanford Law School | China Guiding Cases Project, ‘Guiding Cases in Perspective’, available at: <https://cgc.law.stanford.edu/guiding-cases/>, last visited: 2016/10/20.

  70. 70.

    See Wang (王利明) 2012, p. 71.

  71. 71.

    See Zhao Ji (赵霁), ‘Discussion on the Binding Force of the Guiding Cases’ (《指导性案例的拘束力问题探讨》), available at: <http://www.gy.yn.gov.cn/Article/spyf/dlq2010/fglt/201104/22595.html>, last visited: 2016/7/25.

  72. 72.

    See Han (韩世远) 2011, p. 20. For ‘relative effect’, see Sect. 2.2.2.1.1 of this chapter.

  73. 73.

    See Suli (苏力) 2006, p. 10. See also Suli (苏力) 2004, p. 65.

  74. 74.

    CSSCI journals are recognised as the top journals in Chinese legal academia. See Sect. 2.2.2.5.1.2 of this chapter.

  75. 75.

    See Luan and Luo (栾春娟、罗海山) 2009, p. 71.

  76. 76.

    In addition, scholars suggest that civil law research in China is far from perfect because (1) comparative research only stops at the description of the positive law but fails to touch upon legislative reasons, background, legal practice, etc.; (2) little emphasis has been put on institutional history and theoretical history; and (3) as to the research on judicial decisions, analysing typical cases is the mainstream, while empirical methods are rarely used to provide materials for doctrinal legal research. See Jin (金可可) 2012, p. 50.

  77. 77.

    See Zhang (张明楷) 2011.

  78. 78.

    By the end of 2005, there were only 51.6% of all judges in China who obtained bachelor degrees. See Zhu (朱景文) 2007, pp. 197–198.

  79. 79.

    The top 26 literatures which were cited more than 30 times are all books but no articles. See Luan and Luo (栾春娟、罗海山) 2009, p. 71.

  80. 80.

    The full list is Journal of Comparative Law (《比较法研究》), Contemporary Law Review (《当代法学》), Science of Law (Journal of Northwest University of Political Science and Law)(《法律科学(西北政法大学学报)》), Studies in Law and Business (《法商研究》), Law Science (《法学》), Jurists Review (《法学家》), Legal Forum (《法学论坛》), Law Review (《法学评论》), Chinese Journal of Law (《法学研究》), Law Science Magazine (《法学杂志》), Law and Social Development (《法制与社会发展》), Journal of East China University of Political Science and Law (《华东政法大学学报》), Global Law Review (《环球法律评论》), Tsinghua University Law Journal (《清华法学》), Modern Law Science (《现代法学》), Journal of Political Science and Law (《政法论丛》), Tribune of Political Science and Law (《政法论坛》), Political Science and Law (《政治与法律》), China Legal Science (《中国法学》), Peking University Law Journal (《中外法学》), Administrative Law Review (《行政法学研究》), Criminal Science (《中国刑事法杂志》) and Oriental Law (《东方法学》). See Institute for Chinese Social Sciences Research and Assessment of Nanjing University (南京大学中国社会科学研究评价中心), ‘Public Notification Regarding Journals Selected by the Chinese Social Sciences Citation Index (2017–2018)’ (《关于〈中文社会科学引文索引(CSSCI)来源期刊和收录集刊(2017–2018)目录〉的公示》), available at: <http://cssrac.nju.edu.cn/a/xwdt/zxdt/20170116/2805.html>, last visited: 2017/5/1.

  81. 81.

    ‘The 2007 Initial Training Class for the Xinjiang Political and Legal Cadres Held by Tsinghua University’(首期清华大学新疆政法干部高级培训班) is a good example. It is reported that experts from the Supreme People’s Court, Supreme People’s Procuratorate, Tsinghua University and Peking University gave lectures to the trainees. See Nianci Sheng (盛念慈), ‘The Initial Training Class for the Xinjiang Political and Legal Cadres Held by Tsinghua University is Brought to a Successful Close’ (《首期清华大学新疆政法干部高级培训班圆满结束》), available at: <http://www.xjkunlun.cn/zzgz/gbgz/gbjy/2007/197331.htm>, last visited: 2016/7/25.

  82. 82.

    Many judges try to apply the views of academic authorities to help themselves deal with the intractable cases. The best example is the ‘Chongqing Cable Case’: without precise illustration, the major part of the judgment’s reasoning is exactly the same as one article written by the aforementioned authority Tez-chien Wang. This is well described in Zhu (朱晓喆) 2015, p. 157.

  83. 83.

    In this study, ‘transferring guarantee’ refers to the Chinese concept ‘让与担保’. However, since it is not recorded by the Chinese Property Law 2007, there is a dispute about the meaning of this concept. Furthermore, when dealing with the relevant cases, Chinese judges differ considerably: It is not clear whether the agreement on ‘transferring guarantee’ between the parties should be valid. It is also not clear whether the creditor’s priority right for claim should be supported. For a summary, see Gaoshan Legal (高杉Legal), ‘A Collection of Judicial Viewpoints in Typical Cases on Transferring Guarantee’ (让与担保典型案例裁判观点集成), available at: http://www.360doc.com/content/15/0616/20/22513831_478599531.shtml, last visited: 2017/7/13.

  84. 84.

    Chunlin He v Kaiming Luo (何春霖与罗开明等房屋买卖合同纠纷上诉案), Civil Judgment (2008) Cheng-Min-Zhong-Zi No. 2318 of the Chengdu Intermediate People’s Court in Sichuan Province (四川省成都市中级人民法院(2008)成民终字第2318号民事判决书)

  85. 85.

    The original Chinese name of this department is ‘全国人大常委会法制工作委员会民法室’. On the grounds of its authority given by the Constitution and law, ‘the NPC and its Standing Committee jointly exercise the power to enact laws in China. The Standing Committee enacts and amends all laws except laws that should be enacted and amended by the NPC. When the NPC is not in session, its Standing Committee may partially supplement and amend laws it enacted, provided that the changes do not contravene the laws’ basic principles. The Standing Committee also has the power to interpret the Constitution and other laws’. See the National People’s Congress of the People’s Republic of China, ‘Functions and Powers of the Standing Committee’, available at: <http://www.npc.gov.cn/englishnpc/Organization/2007-11/15/content_1373018.htm>, last visited: 2016/9/8.

  86. 86.

    See Jia (贾东明) 2013.

  87. 87.

    In this sense, a ‘doctrinal approach’ is utilised to describe the law.

  88. 88.

    This is regulated by Article 9 of the Judges Law of the People’s Republic of China (2001 Amendment) (《中华人民共和国法官法(2001修正)》): A judge must possess the following qualifications: … (6)to have engaged in the legal work for at least 2 years in the case of graduates of law major of colleges or universities or from non-law majors of colleges or universities but possessing professional knowledge of law, and among whom those to assume the posts of judges of superior people’s courts and of the Supreme People’s Court shall have engaged in legal work for at least 3 years; or to have engaged in legal work for at least 1 year in the case of those who have a master’s degree of law or doctor’s degree of law, or those who have master’s degree or doctor’s degree of non-law majors but possess the professional knowledge of law, and among whom those to assume the posts of judges of superior people’s courts and of the Supreme People’s Court shall have engaged in legal work for at least 2 years.

  89. 89.

    Taking 10 years of the Great Cultural Revolution as an example, there were 8 law schools in China during 1966–1970, and the number of students who graduated from these 8 law schools was only 833. During 1971–1977, there were only 2 law schools left, and there were only 46 law students graduated per year. See Fang (方流芳) 1996, p. 128.

  90. 90.

    See Suli (苏力) 2006, p. 4.

  91. 91.

    For example, Keqiang Li (李克强), the prime minister and also a member of Politburo Standing Committee, graduated from Peking University and one of his teachers is Xiangrui Gong (龚祥瑞), a very famous administrative law professor. It is suggested that his education received from Peking University may affect his policies on the management of the state. See Chris Buckley, ‘Insight: China premier-in-waiting schooled in era of dissent’, 28 October 2011, available at: <http://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-politcs-li-idUSTRE79R09O20111028>, last visited: 2017/5/5.

  92. 92.

    See Xu (徐卫东) 2008, p. 3.

  93. 93.

    See Suli (苏力) 2006, p. 7.

  94. 94.

    See QS Top Universities, ‘QS World University Rankings by Subject 2012: Law’, available at: <www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2012/subject-rankings/social-science/law?page=1>, last visited: 2013/1/11.

  95. 95.

    See Sina Education (新浪教育), ‘The Report of the Employment of the Undergraduate Students of Tsinghua Law School’ (《清华大学法学院就业情况》), available at: <http://edu.sina.com.cn/gaokao/2012-06-07/2118341709.shtml>, last visited: 2012/12/17. For more information about the courses that Tsinghua Law School students take, see Jiangqiu Ge, ‘The Comparative Contract Law Course in Maastricht seen through Chinese Eyes’, available at: <http://www.mepli.eu/2013/01/the-comparative-contract-law-course-in-maastricht-seen-through-chinese-eyes>, last visited: 2013/2/15.

  96. 96.

    See Ji (冀祥德) 2010, p. 50.

  97. 97.

    See Ji (冀祥德) 2010, p. 51.

  98. 98.

    See Ji (冀祥德) 2010, p. 53.

  99. 99.

    See Shen (沈宗灵) 2004, p. 322.

  100. 100.

    See Liu (刘凯湘) 2008, p. 32. Article 6 reads: ‘Civil activities must be in compliance with the law; where there are no relevant provisions in the law, they shall be in compliance with state policies’.

  101. 101.

    For a brief introduction of the significance of the ‘five-year-plan’, see S. R., ‘Why China’s Five-year Plans are so Important’, The Economist, 26 October 2015, available at: <http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2015/10/economist-explains-24>, last visited: 2016/7/27.

  102. 102.

    See Book 14, Chapter 48 of the 11th Five-Year-Plan (‘十一五’规划) and Book 16 of the 12th Five-Year-Plan (‘十二五’规划).

  103. 103.

    See Liang (梁慧星) 2007, p. 28.

  104. 104.

    See Wang et al. (王利明等) 2011, p. 17.

  105. 105.

    See Liu (刘凯湘) 2008, p. 35.

  106. 106.

    General Provisions of the Civil Law of the People’s Republic of China (《中华人民共和国民法总则》).

  107. 107.

    Article 10 of the General Provisions of the Civil Law 2017.

  108. 108.

    Law of the People’s Republic of China on the Protection of Consumer Rights and Interests (2013 Amendment) (《中华人民共和国消费者权益保护法(2013修正)》).

  109. 109.

    Contract Law of the People’s Republic of China (《中华人民共和国合同法》).

  110. 110.

    It also can be found in Articles 22, 26, 61, 92, 125(1), 136, 293, 368 of the Contract Law 1999.

  111. 111.

    See Mi (米新丽) 2016, p. 32.

  112. 112.

    See Mi (米新丽) 2016, p. 32.

  113. 113.

    For the details of ‘10 Major Measures to Safeguard Consumers 2009’ (2009年十大消费维权举措), see Ren (任震宇) 2009.

  114. 114.

    China Consumers’ Association (中国消费者协会).

  115. 115.

    See Yang (杨兆敏) 2009; Ren (任震宇) 2009.

  116. 116.

    See Li (李华斌) 2008, p. 96.

  117. 117.

    See Mi (米新丽) 2016, p. 36.

  118. 118.

    Yanhui Yan v China Southern Airlines Co Ltd. and Minhui Company (杨艳辉诉南方航空公司、民惠公司客运合同纠纷案), Gazette of the Supreme People’s Court of the People’s Republic of China, 2003(5) (《中华人民共和国最高人民法院公报》2003年第5期).

  119. 119.

    See Workers’ Daily (工人日报) 2003.

  120. 120.

    See Mi (米新丽) 2016, p. 36.

  121. 121.

    They are the Interpretation I of the Supreme People’s Court of Several Issues concerning the Application of the Contract Law of the People’s Republic of China (《最高人民法院关于适用〈中华人民共和国合同法〉若干问题的解释(一)》) (Interpretation No. 19 [1999] of the Supreme People’s Court (法释[1999]19号)) and the Interpretation II of the Supreme People’s Court of Several Issues concerning the Application of the Contract Law of the People’s Republic of China (《最高人民法院关于适用〈中华人民共和国合同法〉若干问题的解释(二)》) (Interpretation No. 5 [2009] of the Supreme People’s Court (法释[2009]5号)).

  122. 122.

    Insurance Law of the People’s Republic of China (2009 Revision) (《中华人民共和国保险法(2009修订)》).

  123. 123.

    Product Quality Law of the People’s Republic of China (2009 Amendment) (《中华人民共和国产品质量法(2009修正)》).

  124. 124.

    Food Safety Law of the People’s Republic of China (2015 Revision) (《中华人民共和国食品安全法(2015修订)》).

  125. 125.

    Regulations on Direct Selling Administration (《直销管理条例》), Order of the State Council, No.443 (国务院令第443号).

  126. 126.

    See Chap. 5 of this study.

  127. 127.

    Shanghai Zhongyuan Property Consultancy Co Ltd. v Dehua Tao (上海中原物业顾问有限公司诉陶德华居间合同纠纷案), Gazette of the Supreme People’s Court of the People’s Republic of China, 2012(2) (《最高人民法院公报》2012年第2期).

  128. 128.

    Jia (贾东明) 2013, p. 3.

  129. 129.

    See Twigg-Flesner 2010, p. 1. See also Smits 2007, p. 1182. ‘There is at present no highest European authority to provide binding contract law rules outside of the (rather limited) competence of the European Union’.

  130. 130.

    See Van den Bergh 2010, p. 57.

  131. 131.

    It states: ‘Save where otherwise provided in the Treaties, the following provisions shall apply for the achievement of the objectives set out in Article 26. The European Parliament and the Council shall, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure and after consulting the Economic and Social Committee, adopt the measures for the approximation of the provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States which have as their object the establishment and functioning of the internal market’.

  132. 132.

    For an introduction of these levels, see Smits 2007, p. 1182.

  133. 133.

    See Smits 2007, p. 1183.

  134. 134.

    For a detailed introduction, see Zweigert and Kötz 1998, pp. 277–285.

  135. 135.

    These three categories can be also described as three major sources, which refer to the founding treaties, EU legislation and the general legal principles shaped by the Court of Justice of the European Union. See Weatherill 2010a, p. 27.

  136. 136.

    See Twigg-Flesner 2010, p. 12.

  137. 137.

    See Twigg-Flesner 2010, p. 4. Article 288(2) TFEU reads: ‘A regulation shall have general application. It shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States’.

  138. 138.

    See Article 288(3) TFEU.

  139. 139.

    See Twigg-Flesner 2010, p. 3.

  140. 140.

    See Müller-Graff 2004, p. 78.

  141. 141.

    See Müller-Graff 2004, p. 77.

  142. 142.

    See Smits 2007, 1193.

  143. 143.

    See Craig and Búrca 2011, p. 600.

  144. 144.

    For example, Germany made use of this minimum harmonisation approach when the Doorstep Selling Directive was implemented. The time limit for withdrawal right regulated by the directive was extended to 14 calendar days, where the directive only requires 7.

  145. 145.

    See Smits 2007, pp. 1185–1186.

  146. 146.

    For example, Twigg-Flesner states: ‘Minimum harmonisation does not eliminate the diversity in the laws and regulations between the Member States, but merely serves to reduce its breadth. Differences remain, and may continue to pose a barrier to the functioning of single market’ (Twigg-Flesner 2013, p. 44).

  147. 147.

    See, for example, Article 4 of the Consumer Rights Directive. It states: ‘Member States shall not maintain or introduce, in their national law, provisions diverging from those laid down in this Directive, including more or less stringent provisions to ensure a different level of consumer protection, unless otherwise provided for in this Directive’.

  148. 148.

    See Recital 3 of the Timeshare Directive and Recitals 5 and 7 of the Consumer Rights Directive.

  149. 149.

    Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council [2005] OJ L149/22.

  150. 150.

    See Recital 17 of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive.

  151. 151.

    Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights, amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 85/577/EEC and Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council [2011] OJ L304/64.

  152. 152.

    For a detailed introduction of these three bodies, see Craig and Búrca 2011, pp. 58–61.

  153. 153.

    For these functions and their legal basis, see Weatherill 2010a, pp. 205–206.

  154. 154.

    See Article 267 TFEU.

  155. 155.

    See Case 376/98 [2000] ECR I-08419.

  156. 156.

    See Smits 2006, p. 68.

  157. 157.

    Twigg-Flesner states: ‘The objective of such work is not only to identify the extent to which there are differences between the national private law systems, but also to consider whether the approach adopted in one particular legal system might offer a template for reform or development elsewhere – including, potentially, harmonisation pursued at the EU level’ Twigg-Flesner 2010, p. 2.

  158. 158.

    See Resolution of the European Parliament of May 26, 1989 on action to bring into line the private law of the Member States [1989] OJ C158/400.

  159. 159.

    For example, the first edition of the book Towards a European Civil Code was published in 1994. The latest version is Hartkamp et al. 2011.

  160. 160.

    The whole clarification reads: ‘Although it is premature to speculate about the possible outcome of the reflection, it is important to explain that it is neither the Commission’s intention to propose a ‘European civil code’ which would harmonise contract laws of Member States, nor should the reflections be seen as in any way calling into question the current approaches to promoting free circulation on the basis of flexible and efficient solutions’. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council, European Contract Law and the revision of the acquis: the way forward, COM(2004) 651 final.

  161. 161.

    For Parts I and II, see Lando and Beale 2000; for Part III, see Lando et al. 2003.

  162. 162.

    For an outline edition, see Bar et al. 2009.

  163. 163.

    See Jansen and Zimmermann 2010.

  164. 164.

    It should be noted that the legal basis for adopting optional instruments remains controversial. For example, CJEU claims that Article 114 TFEU could not provide a legal basis for a measure which leaves unchanged the different national laws already in existence, but instead creates an additional system, since that measure cannot be regarded as being aimed at approximate the laws of the Member States. See Case C-436/03 [2006] ECR I-03733, para. 44.

  165. 165.

    See Green Paper from the Commission of 1 July 2010 on policy options for progress towards a European Contract Law for consumers and businesses, COM(2010) 348 final, p. 9.

  166. 166.

    The first official proposal can be traced back to 1970. See Proposal for a Council Regulation embodying a Statute for European Company, COM(70) 600 final. For a comprehensive analysis of EU optional instruments, see Bull 2016.

  167. 167.

    See Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Common European Sales Law, COM(2011) 635 final.

  168. 168.

    See Annex II, item 60 of the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Commission Work Programme 2015: A New Start, COM(2014) 910 final. The reason of withdrawing the proposal is to modify it in order to ‘fully unleash the potential of ecommerce in the Digital Single Market’.

  169. 169.

    They are the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on certain aspects concerning contracts for the supply of digital contents (COM(2015) 634 final) and the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on certain aspects concerning contracts for the online and other distance sales of goods (COM(2015) 635 final). Further on these proposals, see Smits 2016.

  170. 170.

    With the exception of Ireland, Malta, Portugal and the United Kingdom.

  171. 171.

    See Articles 1–2 CISG.

  172. 172.

    See Article 6 CISG.

  173. 173.

    Unless the seller, at any time before or at the conclusion of the contract, neither knew nor ought to have known that the goods were bought for personal, family or household use. (See Article 2(a) CISG.)

  174. 174.

    See Smits 2014.

  175. 175.

    Council Directive 85/374/EEC of 25 July 1985 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning liability for defective products [1985] OJ L210/29.

  176. 176.

    Council Directive 86/653/EEC of 18 December 1986 on the coordination of the laws of the Member States relating to self-employed commercial agents [1986] OJ L382/17.

  177. 177.

    Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts [1993] OJ L95/29.

  178. 178.

    Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 1999 on certain aspects of the sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees [1999] OJ L171/12.

  179. 179.

    Directive 1999/93/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 1999 on a Community framework for electronic signatures [2000] OJ L13/12.

  180. 180.

    Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market [2000] OJ L178/1.

  181. 181.

    Directive 2001/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 December 2001 on general product safety [2002] OJ L11/4.

  182. 182.

    Directive 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2002 concerning the distance marketing of consumer financial services and amending Council Directive 90/619/EEC and Directives 97/7/EC and 98/27/EC [2002] OJ L271/16.

  183. 183.

    Directive 2006/114/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 concerning misleading and comparative advertising [2006] OJ L376/21.

  184. 184.

    Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on credit agreements for consumers and repealing Council Directive 87/102/EEC [2008] OJ L133/66.

  185. 185.

    Directive 2008/122/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 January 2009 on the protection of consumers in respect of certain aspects of timeshare, long-term holiday product, resale and exchange contracts [2009] OJ L33/10.

  186. 186.

    Directive 2009/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on injunctions for the protection of consumers’ interests [2009] OJ L110/30.

  187. 187.

    Directive (EU) 2015/2302 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2015 on Package Travel and Linked Travel Arrangements, amending Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 and Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council and Repealing Council Directive 90/314/EEC [2015] OJ L326/1.

  188. 188.

    See Evaluation and Fitness Check (FC) Roadmap 2015, pp. 1–2.

  189. 189.

    It will be evaluated separately by the Commission in accordance with its Article 30. See Evaluation and Fitness Check (FC) Roadmap 2015, p. 2.

  190. 190.

    Council Directive of 20 December 1985 to protect the consumer in respect of contracts negotiated away from business premises (85/577/EEC) [1985] OJ L 372/31.

  191. 191.

    Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 1997 on the protection of consumers in respect of distance contracts [1997] OJ L144/19.

  192. 192.

    Directive 2009/138/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 on the taking-up and pursuit of the business of Insurance and Reinsurance (Solvency II) [2009] OJ L 335/1.

  193. 193.

    See Twigg-Flesner 2013, p. 30.

  194. 194.

    The predecessor of Article 114 TFEU is Article 95 TEC. Prior to the SEA, harmonisation measures had to be adopted on the basis of Article 94 TEC. But Article 94 TEC requires the unanimity within the European Council and only involves the European Parliament by way of consultation. To Twigg-Flesner, Article 95 TEC (now Article 114 TFEU) introduced a more efficient procedure, allowing for harmonisation measures to be adopted by qualified majority voting. Furthermore, the co-decision procedure, giving the Parliament greater involvement and the power to block the adoption of legislation, must be followed. See Twigg-Flesner 2013, pp. 30–31.

  195. 195.

    See Article 114(1) TFEU. It is just as Twigg-Flesner states: ‘The bulk of European Union private law is the result of the legislative harmonisation agenda pursued by the EU, primarily in pursuit of its objective of creating an internal market’ Twigg-Flesner 2010, p. 2.

  196. 196.

    Smits 2006, p. 57.

  197. 197.

    See aforementioned Chap. 1, Sect. 1.3.2.3.2.

  198. 198.

    See Schmid 2005, pp. 215–216.

  199. 199.

    Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on Contract Law, COM(2001) 398 final, para. 23.

  200. 200.

    See Weatherill 2010b, p. 58. See also Müller-Graff 2004, p. 78. The latter reads: ‘In the present state of development of primary Community law no express power is vested in the Community to issue a directive that would oblige the Member States to adopt a Civil Code or a coherent net of rules which constitute the core and system of private law’.

  201. 201.

    See Twigg-Flesner 2013, p. 31.

  202. 202.

    See C-376/98 [2000] ECR I-08419.

  203. 203.

    See Smits 2007, p. 1189. To quote Hans-W. Micklitz, EC consumer law ‘is no longer social protection that legitimates market regulation to fight down imbalance of power, but economic instrumentalisation to establish the Internal Market’. Micklitz 2005, p. 553.

  204. 204.

    Article 169(1) TFEU reads: ‘In order to promote the interests of consumers and to ensure a high level of consumer protection, the Union shall contribute to protecting the health, safety and economic interests of consumers, as well as to promoting their right to information, education and to organise themselves in order to safeguard their interests’.

  205. 205.

    See Smits 2006, p. 73.

  206. 206.

    See Zimmermann 2009, p. 481.

  207. 207.

    Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, A European Consumer Agenda – Boosting confidence and growth, COM(2012) 225 final.

  208. 208.

    See Twigg-Flesner 2013, pp. 34–35.

  209. 209.

    See Recital 4 of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive and Recital 6 of the Consumer Rights Directive.

  210. 210.

    Smits 2006, p. 73.

References

  • (Bar, Clive, Schulte-Nölke, Beale, Herre, Huet, Storme, Swann, Varul, Veneziano & Zoll 2009) Christian von Bar, Eric Clive, Hans Schulte-Nölke, Hugh Beale, Johnny Herre, Jérôme Huet, Matthias Storme, Stephen Swann, Paul Varul, Anna Veneziano and Fryderyk Zoll (eds.), Principles, Definitions and Model Rules of European Private Law: Draft Common Frame of Reference (DCFR), Outline Edition, prepared by the Study Group on a European Civil Code and the Research Group on EC Private Law (Acquis Group) based in part on a revised version of the Principles of European Contract Law, Munich: sellier. european law publishers, 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • (Van den Bergh 2010) Roger Van den Bergh, ‘Private Law in a Globalizing World: Economic Criteria for Choosing the Optimal Regulatory Level in a Multilevel Government System’, in Michael Faure & André van der Walt (eds.), Globalization and Private Law: The Way Forward, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2010, p. 57–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • (Bull 2016) William A. Bull, Optional Instruments of the European Union: A Definitional, Normative and Explanatory Study, Cambridge: Intersentia, 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  • (Cao (曹士兵) 2006) 曹士兵[Shibing Cao]:《最高人民法院裁判、司法解释的法律地位》[The Status of Decisions and Judicial Interpretations of the Supreme People’s Court],《中国法学》2006年第3期[China Legal Science, 2006(3)],第175—181页[p. 175–181]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Chen 2010) Lei Chen, ‘Private Property with Chinese Characteristics: A Critical Analysis of the Chinese Law on Property of 2007’, 18 European Review of Private Law 5, 2010, p. 983–1004.

    Google Scholar 

  • (Craig & Búrca 2011) Paul Craig & Gráinne de Búrca, EU Law: Texts, Cases, and Materials, 5th edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • (Han (韩世远) 2011) 韩世远[Shiyuan Han]:《合同法总论》[The Law of Contract],法律出版社2011年第3版[Law Press, 2011, 3rd Edition]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Han (韩世远) 2015) 韩世远[Shiyuan Han]:“消费者合同三题:知假买假、惩罚性赔偿与合同终了”[Three Problematic Issues in Consumer Contracts: Buying Fake on Purpose, Punitive Damage and the End of Contract],《法律适用》2015年第10期[Journal of Law Application, 2015(10)],第87—92页[p. 87–92]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Hartkamp, Hesselink, Hondius, Mak & Perron 2011) Arthu Hartkamp, Martijn Hesselink, Ewoud Hondius, Chantal Mak, Edgar du Perron (eds.), Towards a European Civil Code, Fourth revised and expanded edition, Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International, 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • (Hu & Yu (胡云腾、于同志) 2008) 胡云腾、于同志[Yunteng Hu & Tongzhi Yu]:“案例指导制度若干重大疑难争议问题研究”[On Several Significant and Difficult Issues Regarding the Case Guidance System],《法学研究》2008年第6期[Chinese Journal of Law, 2008(6)],第3—24页[p. 3–24]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Huang (黄金荣) 2014) 黄金荣[Jinrong Huang]:“‘规范性文件’的法律界定及其效力”[The Definition of ‘Regulatory Documents’ and Its Legal Effects],《法学》2014年第7期[Law Science, 2014(7)],第10-20页[p. 10–20]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Jansen & Zimmermann 2010) Nils Jansen & Reinhard Zimmermann, ‘A European Civil Code in All But Name: Discussing the Nature and Purposes of the Draft Common Frame of Reference’, 69 The Cambridge Law Journal 1, 2010, p. 98–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • (Ji (冀祥德) 2010) 冀祥德[Xiangde Ji]:“对中国法学教育全面反思与展望”[The Difficulties and Prospects of the Current Legal Education in China],《中国政法大学学报》2010年第4期[Journal of CUPL, 2010(4)],第50—58页。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Jia (贾东明) 2013) 贾东明主编[Dongming Jia (ed.)]:《中华人民共和国消费者权益保护法解读》[Understanding on the Law of the People’s Republic of China on the Protection of Consumer Rights and Interests],中国法制出版社2013年版[China Legal Publishing House, 2013]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Jin (金可可) 2012) 金可可[Keke Jin]:“民法实证研究方法与民法教义学”[On Empirical Approach of Civil Law and Doctrinal Approcah of Civil Law],《法学研究》2012年第1期[Chinese Journal of Law],第48—50页[p. 48–50]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Lando & Beale 2000) Ole Lando & Hugh Beale (eds.), Principles of European Contract Law, Parts I and II (Combined and Revised), prepared by the Commission of European Contract Law, the Hague: Kluwer Law International, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • (Lando, Clive, Prüm & Zimmermann 2003) Ole Lando, Eric Clive, André Prüm & Reinhard Zimmermann (eds.), Principles of European Contract Law, Part III, prepared by the Commission on European Contract Law, the Hague: Kluwer Law International, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • (Lei (雷磊) 2015) 雷磊[Lei Lei]:“指导性案例法源地位再反思”[Rethinking the Guiding Cases’ Status of Legal Sources],《中国法学》2015年第1期[China Legal Science, 2015(1)],第272—290页[p. 272–290]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Li & Liu (李龙、刘诚) 2005) 李龙、刘诚[Long Li & Cheng Liu]:“论法律渊源——以法学方法和法律方法为视角”[On Sources of Law – From the Perspective of Legal and Jurisprudence Methodologies],《法律科学》2005年第2期[Law Science (Journal of Northwest University of Politics and Law), 2005(2)],第3-8页[p. 3–8]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Li (李华斌) 2008) 李华斌[Huabin Li]:“12点后退房,宾馆多收半天房费合法吗?”[Is It Lawful for Hotels to Charge Half Day’s Fee When Check-out After 12.00?],《中国审判》2008年第8期[China Trial, 2008(8)],第94—98页[p. 94–98]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Liang (梁慧星) 2007) 梁慧星[Huixing Liang]:《民法总论》[General Introduction to Civil Law],法律出版社2007年第3版[Law Press, 2007, 3rd Edition]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Liu (刘凯湘) 2008) 刘凯湘主编[Kaixiang Liu (ed.)]:《民法学》[Civil Law],中国法制出版社2008年第三版[China Legal Publishing House, 2008, 3rd Edition]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Liu (柳建龙) 2011) 柳建龙[Jianlong Liu]:“合宪性原则的本相与争论”[The Truth and Discussion of the Principle of Constitutionality],《清华法学》2011年第1期[Tsinghua University Law Journal, 2011(1)],第108—124页[p. 108–124]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Luan & Luo (栾春娟、罗海山) 2009) 栾春娟、罗海山[Chunjuan Luan, Haishan Luo]:“中国民事法学研究现状的考察”[A Study on Chinese Civil Law Research],《哈尔滨工业大学学报(社会科学版)》2009年第4期[Journal of Harbin Institute of Technology(Social Sciences Edition), 2009(4)],第67—72页[p. 67–72]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Mi (米新丽) 2016) 米新丽[Xinli Mi]:“关于交易习惯的几点思考”[Several Thoughts About Transaction Customs],《政法论丛》2016年第2期[Journal of Political Science and Law, 2016(2)],第31—37页[p. 31–37]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Micklitz 2005) Hans-W. Micklitz, ‘The Concept of Competitive Contract Law’, 23 Penn State International Law Review 3, p. 549–585.

    Google Scholar 

  • (Müller-Graff 2004) Peter-Christian Müller-Graff, ‘EC Directives as a Means of Private Law Unification’, in Arthur Hartkamp, Martijn Hesselink, Ewoud Hondius, Carla Joustra, Edgar du Perron & Muriel Veldman (eds.), Towards a European Civil Code, 3rd fully revised and expanded edition, Nijmegen: Kluwer Law International, 2004, p. 77–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • (Qu (屈文生) 2012) 屈文生[Wensheng Qu]:“和制汉语法律新名词在近代中国的翻译与传播——以清末民初若干法律辞书收录的词条为例”[The Translation and Dissemination of Modern Chinese Legal Concepts Coined in Japan – The Research on Entries Included by Several Legal Dictionaries in Late Qing and Early Republic],《学术研究》2012年第11期[Academic Research, 2012(11)],第122—129页[p. 122–129]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Ren (任震宇) 2009) 任震宇[Zhenyu Ren]:“中消协公布2009年消费维权十大举措”[The China Consumers’ Association Publishes 10 Major Measures to Safeguard Consumers’ Rights 2009],《中国消费者报》2009年3月20日第A02版[China Consumer News, 2009/3/20, Page A02]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Schmid 2005) Christoph U. Schmid, ‘The Instrumentalist Conception of the Acquis Communautaire in Consumer Law and Its Implications on a European Contract Law Code’, 1 European Review of Contract Law 2, 2005, p. 211–227.

    Google Scholar 

  • (Shen (沈宗灵) 2004) 沈宗灵[Zongling Shen]:《法理学》[Jurisprudence],高等教育出版社2004年第2版[Higher Education Press, 2004, 3rd Edition]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Smits 2006) Jan M. Smits, ‘European Private Law: A Plea for A Spontaneous Legal Order’, in Deirdre M. Curtin, Jan M. Smits, André Klip, Joseph A. McCahery, European Integration and Law: Four Contributions on the Interplay between European Integration and European and National Law to Celebrate the 25th Anniversary of Maastricht University’s Faculty of Law, Antwerpen: Intersentia, 2006, p. 55–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • (Smits 2007) Jan Smits, ‘Law Making in the European Union: On Globalization and Contract Law in Divergent Legal Cultures’, 67 Louisiana Law Review, 2007, p. 1181–1203.

    Google Scholar 

  • (Smits 2014) Jan M. Smits, William Bull, Catalina Goanta & Mark Kawakami (eds.), European Private Law(2014–2016), 4th Edition, Nijmegen: Ars Aequi Libri, 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  • (Smits 2016) Jan M. Smits, ‘New European Union Proposals for Distance Sales and Digital Contents Contracts: Fit for Purpose?’, Zeitschrift für europäisches Privatrecht 2, 2016, p. 319–324.

    Google Scholar 

  • (Suli (苏力) 2004) 苏力[Suli]:《也许正在发生——转型中国的法学》[Maybe It is Happening – The Transformation of China’s Legal Scholarship],法律出版社2004年版[Law Press, 2004]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Suli (苏力) 2006) 苏力[Suli]:“当代中国法学教育的挑战与机遇”[The Challenges and Opportunities of Chinese Modern Legal Education],《法学》2006年第2期[Law Science, 2006(2)],第3—21页[p. 3–21]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Twigg-Flesner 2010) Christian Twigg-Flesner, ‘Introduction: Key Features of European Union Private Law’, in Christian Twigg-Flesner (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to European Union Private Law, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010, p. 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • (Twigg-Flesner 2013) Christian Twigg- Flesner, The Europeanisation of Contract Law: Current Controversies in Law, 2nd edition, Abingdon: Routledge, 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  • (Wang et al. (王利明等) 2011) 王利明等[Liming Wang et al.]:《民法学》[Civil Law],法律出版 社2011年第3版[Law Press, 2011, 3rd Edition]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Wang (王利明) 2012) 王利明[Liming Wang]:“我国案例指导制度若干问题研究”[On Chinese Case Guidance System],《法学》2012年第1期[Law Science, 2012(1)],第71—80页[p. 71–80]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Wang (王书成) 2012) 王书成[Shucheng Wang]:“论合宪性解释方法”[On the Interpretation of Constitutionality],《法学研究》2012年第5期[Chinese Journal of Law, 2012(5)],第50—68页[p. 50–68]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Weatherill 2010a) Stephen Weatherill, Cases and Materials on EU Law, 9th edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  • (Weatherill 2010b) Stephen Weatherill, ‘Competence and European Private Law’, in Christian Twigg-Flesner (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to European Union Private Law, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010, p. 58–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • (Workers’ Daily (工人日报) 2003) 工人日报[Workers’ Daily]:“一场诉讼改变了民航规定”[A Lawsuit Change CAAC’s Regulation],《工人日报》2003年6月14日[Workers’ Daily, 2003/6/14]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Xu (徐卫东) 2008) 徐卫东[Weidong Xu]:“中国高等法学教育三十年发展回顾”[Thirty Years of Legal Education in Main Land of China],《当代法学》2008年第1期[Contemporary Law Review, 2008(1)],第3—10页[p. 3–10]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Yang (杨琴) 2011) 杨琴[Qin Yang]:“中日经济发展与消费者法制”[Sino-Japanese Economic Development and Consumer Law],《贵州大学学报(社会科学版)》2011年第6期[Journal of Guizhou University(Social Sciences), 2011(6)],第24—31页[p. 24–31]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Yang (杨兆敏) 2009) 杨兆敏[Zhaomin Yang]:“只要损害了利益,就要挑战行规权威”[Industry’s Authority Should be Challenged When Consumers’ Interests Are Infringed],《工人日报》2009年9月9日第5版[Workers’ Daily, 2009/09/09, Page 5]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Zhang (张文显) 2007) 张文显主编[Wenxian Zhang (ed.)]:《法理学》[Jurisprudence],高等教育出版社2007年第3版[Higher Education Press, 2007, 3rd Edition]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Zhang (张文显) 2011) 张文显主编[Wenxian Zhang (ed.)]:《法理学》[Jurisprudence],高等教育出版社2011年第4版[Higher Education Press, 2011, 4th Edition]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Zhang (张明楷) 2011) 张明楷[Mingkai Zhang]:《刑法学》[Criminal Law],法律出版社2011年第四版[Law Press, 2011, 4th Edition]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Zhu (朱景文) 2007) 朱景文[Jingwen Zhu]:《中国法律发展报告》[Report on the Chinese Legal Development],中国人民大学出版社2007年版[China Renmin University Press, 2007]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Zhu (朱晓喆) 2015) 朱晓喆[Xiaozhe Zhu]:“比较民法与判例研究的立场和使命”[The Standpoints and Aims of Comparative Civil Law and Case Study],《华东政法大学学报》2015年第2期[ECUPL Journal, 2015(2)],第149— 160页[p. 149-160]。

    Google Scholar 

  • (Zimmermann 2009) Reinhard Zimmermann, ‘The Present State of European Private Law’, 57 American Journal of Comparative Law 2, 2009, p. 479–512.

    Google Scholar 

  • (Zweigert & Kötz 1998) Konrad Zweigert and Hein Kötz, An Introduction to Comparative Law, Translated by Tony Weir, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

Research Services, Working Papers, Etc

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Law, Fudan University, Shanghai, China

    Jiangqiu Ge

Authors
  1. Jiangqiu Ge
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Ge, J. (2019). Sources of Consumer Contract Law. In: A Comparative Analysis of Policing Consumer Contracts in China and the EU. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-2989-0_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-2989-0_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-13-2988-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-13-2989-0

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation