Interpretation Of "Agency In One's Own Name" In Contract Law

This paper is organized around the rule of 402 and 403 in Chinese Contract Law, combined with the rule of 121, the trustee-trader in Chinese Contract Law, and relevant agency regulations in General Rules of the Civil Law.In the first part this paper points out, there are several main disadvantages of agency research: one is one-sided emphasis on define of "agent in one's own name". For our country's contract law adopt not only rules of Anglo-American law, but also rules of Continental law. To understand the mixed rules, we can not simply copy the traditional civil law or common law, but should find our own answers. The second limitation is insisting on the opposition of "The Theory of Separation" and "The Theory of Identity ". The opposition may not exist, and the differences between Civil law and Anglo-American law mainly lie in Anglo-American law's practical way and broad concept of agency. The third limitation is the lack of perspective on applying of the law .The application of law will not be understand very well.In the second part of this paper, the author points out, to deal with the research limitations, shifting of several research ideas is necessary. Firstly, build practical classification of our agent system, according to the provisions of the law. Secondly,"explain theory"shall be underlined and the law interpretation methods must be followed. Various methods of interpretation are in mutual relationships. Thirdly, using traditional analysis tools to find out the contract sanctions. At last, the agency rules not only involve the element of the concrete content, but also involve the burden of proof elements, so it is necessary to add the "proof responsibility" to legal interpretation.In the third part this paper uses these new methods to analyze the agency law. For example, "contract constraint the third party and client" includes four components: (1) the contract is signed by the agent and the third person. (2) there are evidences that the third person know or should know the existence of principal. (3) in the third party's opinion, the trustee within the scope of authority granted by the principal contract. (4) there are no evidence that can prove the trustee is entered into a contract for themselves. " Finally, the author in the conclusion also points out that the limitation of this paper. For example, the division of the agency is not clear, and the legal interpretation methods are not used very well.All in all, this paper attempts to bring some new ideas on study of"Agency in one's own name", and emphasizes the importance of legal interpretations. We hope that this paper can make some contribute to the deepening of the research in this field.