Limitele răspunderii contractuale. Răspunderea contractuală în interstiţiile relativităţii contractului
The limits of contractual liability. Contractual liability in the interstices of contract relativity

Summary/Abstract: The doctrine and case law on the possible competition between contractual and non-contractual liability provide a variety of answers, which do not uniformly meet the requirement of separation of regimes between the two types of liability. The major problems concern the possibility of aggregation of contractual and tortious liability between the parties, or of liability arising in relations between parties to a contract and third parties. If the logic of the relativity of the contract rationally leads to the relativity of contractual remedies and, implicitly, to the non-option between liabilities, this does not mean that the same logic also helps us to make firm choices between existing types of liability. This study is dedicated to identifying a firm criterion to be followed for determining incident liability in sensitive situations. One such identifiable criterion is that of the function of “equivalence” which contractual liability fulfills, as opposed to the criterion of restauratio ante iniuriam, like the opposition between the new (the contract that should have been performed) and the old (restoration to the situation prior to the creation of the damage). This criterion may or may not be accompanied by additional criteria designed to ensure that the main dividing line between contractual liability and liability in tort or delict is verified.

• Details
• Contents