On The Responsibilities Of The Unauthorized Agent To The Bona Fide Opposite Party

Article 171,Paragraph 3 of the General Provisions of the Civil Law stipulates the responsibilities of the unauthorized agent to the bona fide opposite party.However,there are many disputes in the academic circles about this provision,and there are also different views in the judicial judgment.This article attempts to combine relevant theories and extraterritorial legislation,based on judicial practice,it will deeply study the legal nature,constituent elements,and content of responsibility of the unauthorized agent's liability to the bona fide opposite party.There are five chapters in this article.The main contents of each chapter are as follows:The first chapter discusses the legal nature of the responsibility of the unauthorized agent to the bona fide opposite party.This article analyzes five different theories.The responsibility of an unauthorized agent to a bona fide opposite party should be no-fault liability.The legal guarantee liability is the most in line with the current regulations,and the legal nature of the liability of unauthorized agents is most clearly explained,and it is also the closest to the meaning of unauthorized agents and the bona fide opposite party.The second chapter studies the constituent elements of the responsibility of unauthorized agents to the benevolent counterpart.After analyzing different theories,this article believes that it should include three constituent elements:one is the lack of agency power in agency behavior;the second is the tratification of the act is denied;the third is the bona fide opposite party.The third chapter analyzes the unauthorized agent's performance of debt obligations to the bona fide opposite party.Regulating the performance of obligations can make up for the inadequacy of the legislative model that separately stipulates liability for damages.When ratification of the act is denied,the agency act shall take effect between the unauthorized agent and the bona fide opposite party according to law,and the unauthorized agent generally accepts all the principal's rights and debts of the agent in the agency.This obligation to perform debts is not restricted by the current provisions.Chapter IV discusses the liability of unauthorized agents for compensation to the bona fide opposite party.The liability for compensation of unauthorized agents shall be dealt with separately according to whether they are aware of the lack of agency rights:if the agent without authority does not know that he lacks the authority of the principal,he shall only be liable for the damage compensation of the trust interest,and the compensation shall not exceed the interest that could have been obtained by the opposite party if the act were ratified by the principal;if the agent without authority knows that he lacks the authority of the principal,he shall be liable for damages to perform the benefits.Chapter V studies the relationship between the unauthorized agent's performance of performing obligation and damage obligation liability to the bona fide opposite party.In the legislative model where unauthorized agents perform debt obligation and damage obligation,the bona fide opposite party is allowed to choose one of the responsibilities to claim.Although the Civil Law does not restrict the right of the bona fide opposite party,we can draw on the extraterritorial legislation and its theory to further distinguish according to whether the unauthorized agent knows that it lacks the agency right:if the unauthorized agent does not know that he lacks the agency right,the bona fide opposite party may choose to claim to perform debt liability or perform damage compensation liability for benefits;if the unauthorized agent knows that he lacks the agency right,the bona fide opposite party can only choose to claim liability for damages for trust.