"general Principles Of International Commercial Contracts Rights Of Third System

In the traditional theory of the contracts, the doctrine of privity of contract stands for the proposition that a contract cannot, as a general rule, confer rights or impose obligations arising under it on any person except the parties to it. The doctrine of privity of contract laid the foundation for the freedom of contract in terms of system. The contract which is concluded by the parties for themselves precludes third parties from obtaining rights or bearing obligations under it With the economic growth, market transaction become more and more diverse, the continuity and interdependence of the transaction process are reinforced, leading to the third party appearing in the contractual relationship frequently. Following the issue of third party rights arising in the field of the contract, the status of the third party are concerned and admitted by the contracts to meet the need of practice. It is widely accepted the parties may confer by agreement a right on a third party who is also regarded as a beneficiary of the contract. Thus, in 2004 UNIDRIOT-The International Institute for the Unification of Private Law amended the Principles for International Commercial Contracts 1994, and in the new edition added CHAPTER5 SECTION1 which provided systematically Third Party Rights.Since the Principles for International Commercial Contracts publishing in 1994, it has deeply influenced the practice of international commerce and generally recognized by every country. The new edition Principles for International Commercial Contracts 2004 provides solutions to varying kinds of interests' issues arising in the international commercial field. The additional topic of Third Party Rights in the new edition represent the first time that the issue of the Third Party Rights is solved in the international instruments. our country is lack of the legislation of Third Party Rights so far. For example, the new contract law which put into practices in 1999 addresses this issue ambiguously. First of all, it hasn't definitely provided whether the third party can enjoy the right under the contract. Secondly, the articles are too sketchy to address the issues such as the conditions under which the third party can obtain rights and the balance of the interests of the parties to the contract and the third party. As a result, it failed to provide adequate legal evidence for the judgment. Therefore, it is necessary to...