Advertisement Offering A Reward Of Legal Research

Reward hasn't been regulated clearly in China, so there are different opinions about it in theory and legal practice. After thorough research of reward, the author tries to find out reasonable solution and provide some advices on the future legislation on the basis of legal practice, through comprehensive use of comparative method, analytical method of history and method of interest evaluation. The paper consists of four parts.In the first part, the basic theory of reward is analyzed involving its concept, nature and characteristics and comparison of other relevant concepts. There are two kinds of concepts of reward in the narrow sense and the broad sense. Narrowly, a reward is the advertisement of reward, and broadly, a reward means a kind of legal relation involving combination of advertisement of and performance of certain obligation. It is uncertain whether a reward is unilateral legal act or contract or not. The author argues that the two kinds of doctrines can interpret reward, and the both have their own reasonability and complement each other in practice. Considering the purpose of reward and the intent of the parties, a reward seems to be mutual and should be regarded as a contract. According to the contract doctrine, a reward is unilateral, rewarding, and performing. Its offerees are uncertain and the offer can be accepted only by performance. The author also compares reward with donation contract, work contract and commercial advertisement.The second part talks about the establishment, effectiveness and relation of right and obligation of reward. Its offer is the advertisement which can be rescinded under certain conditions. Performance is the acceptance of reward and after that, a reward is effective. Except for the basic elements, a reward excludes the persons who have statutory or contract obligation for its performance. The relation between right and obligation means that right to petition for remuneration of the performer and the obligation of adviser to pay. In case of unclear sum of remuneration, the reward should be performed reasonably. If more than one performs, the obligation should beover after the first one is rewarded kindly. The charge for the performance should be repaid by the offer if management of no cause is founded. Or no should be responsible for it except the performer himself.The third part mentions several familiar rewards. Summarizing characteristics of high-class reward and analyzing its nature, the author contends for the interests of performers that the contents of reward should be clarified, rescission not allowed, the obligation to evaluation regulated and relevant intellectual property rights protected. As for a reward for lost property, the author argues that it is not against the present provision and should not be regard null and void. After that the author suggests that the one who pick up the lost should own the right for remuneration. At the same time, he may shoulder the obligation to notice, announce or report and deposit, etc. The penal reward belongs to civil legal relation. Its offeror should be restricted to the investigation organ. Thus the parties of a reward does not include the criminal in a joint crime, a person who harbours criminals and contraband goods, witness who is forced to suggest criminal clues, or near relative etc. Other suspects or criminals can be parties of reward. As for the loss caused by a penal reward, the author also suggests that some social salvation organ should be perfected.Some legislative advices on rewards are provided in the fourth part of the paper.