Discuss On Responsibility Of The Unauthorized Agent In A Narrow Sense

In connection with the responsibility of the unauthorized agent in a narrow sense,China’s Civil Legislations are simple and crude. Especially in characteristic, manner,scope of the responsibility of the unauthorized agent in a narrow sense to the relative.Theoretical research has remained mostly in the introduction of the foreign theory andlegislation, there is no in-depth discussion. This paper is divided into six parts on theresponsibility of the unauthorized agent in a narrow sense to the relative.The first part is the perspective of the legal effect of the narrow no right to agentbehavior, in order to build a platform to discuss the formation of responsibility.Analyze in China’s legislation of the unauthorized agent in a narrow sense to therelative responsibility combined with foreign legislation. Pointed out that China’slegislative unknown to the provisions of the responsibility for the composition, nature,manner and scope of compensation. And, on the basis of a brief introduction on thetheoretical circles of different points of view of the constituent elements of thisresponsibility. Comparative analysis and concluded, this pre-condition for theestablishment of the responsibility should have no right to agent behavior, the agentfails to ratify the unauthorized agency behavior and relatively in good faith and didnot exercise the right of withdrawal. At the same time discuss on the details of right toratify and the relative’s right of withdrawal. In the last, considering the restrictiveconditions established by the narrow no right to the agent to the relative responsibility, from the point of view the conduct capacity of no right to the agent, the subjectivestate of relative and the right to request elimination of aging, discuss the responsibilityof no right to the agent in a narrow sense to relative can be exempted from anydefenses.The second section focuses on the narrow sense does not have an agenttheoretical basis of the relative responsibility. On the basis of in-depth presentation onTort Liability, Culpa in Contrahendo, Implied Warranty, Contractual Obligations andthe Special Regulations. Comment each doctrine one by one and point out that theSpecial Regulations more legitimate and reasonable as to the nature of thisresponsibility.The third part is discussed in the narrow sense does not have an agent relativeaccountability, through the introduction of extraterritorial legislation’s responsibilityto select the mode and responsibilities of single mode, combined with China’slegislative practice and theoretical research, I believe that insist otherwise provided bylaw discuss the way theoretical premise of this obligation is certainly reasonable tosettle the obligation and on this basis, it is recommended that our legislation so as toadopt standards applicable to performance and by way of damages. Defined the lossrange of the reliance interests and fulfilled interests in the case of unauthorized agency.And under the guidance of the legislative value of the balanced interests, according tothe subjective states of the unauthorized agency to clear this responsibility to relative:When subjective bad faith, the relative performance of the loss of interest should bearthe performance or compensation liability; not entitled to an agent subjective goodfaith, only to bear the relative interests of the trust liability for damages; shall not atthe same time in favor of the interests of the trust and performance benefits. From thepoint of view the subjective state of relative, the conduct capacity of no right to theagent and the right to request elimination of aging, discusses the responsibility of noright to the agent in a narrow sense to relative can be exempted from any defenses.