The Study On The Contract Rule Of Significant Misconception

In practice, there are lots of controversies on the significant misconception rule in its concept, content and components, etc. The paper is composed of four parts, in which those controversical issues will be discussed, as well as the authors's point of view will be put forward while analyzing the theoretical perspectives of some scholars.In the first part, the author starts the discussion about the meaning of"significant misconception"by providing various definitions of it among Chinese theorists, and differentiates misconception and mistake, defining that they are different in both scope and apperance period.The second part starts from the source of mistake rules----the Roman law---by analyzing the theoretical basis of the mistake rules, and the type of mistake in Roman law. At the same time, the paper summarizes the mistake rules of the representative countries within the two legal systems. It analyzes some hot spot issues that interest scholars by which the author illustrates her position.The third part accounts for a large proportion of the text, focusing on the introduction of the design of the contract rule of significant misconception in China. First of all, it begins from the content and components of significant misconception contract. Meanwhile, the paper makes analyses one by one of the factors listed in our law that compose significant misconception contract. As for the components of the significant misconception contract, the necessary parts can be summed up as the following three aspects: the the person who misunderstands, how to confirm whether a misconception is significant, and the subjective states of the subjects. Since the establishment of the significant misconception contract is related to the value orientation of lawmaking, the subjective states of the subjects are also taken into account while a significant misconception is confirmed. When discussing how"significant"is, the following two aspects should be considered: whether what causes the misconception is an significant item of the contract, and if the misconception has brought about significant effect on the party's rights and obligations.Thirdly, subjective states of both parties make effect on the significant misconception. Secondly, the paper goes back to the revokable contract rule itself. After comparison among the significant misconception contracts, fraud contracts and unconscionable contracts, the author discovers that the boundaries of these types of contracts are not clear either in theory or in practice, especially between the significant misconception and blant unfairness, the distinction significance of which only stays on the textual representation, so that the paper recommends an amendment from the law. Moreover, the author adds two typical cases in the third part so as to support what is described in the above.The last part is some suggestions made by the author on improving the contract rule of significant misconception. The author makes analyses of both the value choice on the mistake rules and the legislative model of the contract rule of significant misconception, in expectation of establishing the significant misconception rule that is most suitable for the situation of our country.