Sąžiningumo imperatyvas ikisutartiniuose santykiuose: turinys ir taikymo problematika

LTStraipsnyje analizuojama šiuo laikotarpiu aktuali sąžiningumo imperatyvo, kaip neteisėtų veiksmų nustatymo ikisutartiniuose santykiuose, taikymo problematika Lietuvos civilinės teisės ir lyginamų skirtingų jurisdikcijų kontekste. Įvertinusi šiandienes Lietuvos praktikos realijas, straipsnio autorė atskleidžia ikisutartinio sąžiningumo turinį, daug dėmesio skirdama dviejų elementų – draudimo vesti derybas neturint tikslo sudaryti sutartį ir reikalavimo nenutraukti toli pažengusių derybų be pakankamos priežasties – analizei. Kadangi Lietuvos doktrinoje šie klausimai plačiau nenagrinėti, temos analizei ir formuojamoms išvadoms pagrįsti remiamasi užsienio autorių darbais bei kitų valstybių suformuota ilgalaike teismų praktika.

ENThe author examines the imperative of good faith as the concept determining the illegal actions during the pre-contractual phase in the content of Lithuanian civil law and different continental and common law legal systems. In the continental legal system the good faith is applicable to the negotiating parties by the legislative or extra legem manner. The common law countries traditionally do not recognize the duty to act in good faith during the pre-contractual phase; however at the end of XX century these countries indirectly approached to the application of good faith to the negotiating parties. The duty to act in good faith requires that the parties would start and continue negotiations only with the real intention to conclude the contract. Whether the intention to conclude the contract exists or not, or whether the intention after some time has ended should be determined by the assessment of all actual negotiation’s factors. The application of misrepresentation in the practice of common law legal system provides against the abuse of pre-contractual rights and requires entering into negotiations only with real intentions. The content of pre-contractual good faith includes the requirement not to breach off the negotiations without the reasonable cause when the other party had already had a good reason to believe that the contract will be concluded. It is considered that the progress of negotiations is deeply advanced when the parties have agreed on all major conditions of the future transaction and the pre-contractual reliance exists. The breach of such negotiations is determined as justifiable if the reasons are objective.The parties have the right to maximize the benefits of a future transaction and to conclude the contract on the most advantageous conditions, but the Lithuanian case law states that, in order to ensure the stability of civil practice, the more profitable offer from the third party is not considered as a good reason to break off the negotiations when one of the parties has a reasonable background to believe that the contract will be concluded.