误导自由:特拉华州法律下围绕欺诈订立合同的虚构自由

Hao Jiang
{"title":"误导自由:特拉华州法律下围绕欺诈订立合同的虚构自由","authors":"Hao Jiang","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2815380","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the past 15 years, Delaware courts seem to have created a rule that allowed sophisticated parties to contract around fraud by using an unambiguous disclaimer and integration clause. Supposedly, an extra-contractual fraud claim would be dismissed had there been an unambiguous disclaimer. However, a survey of Delaware cases tells a different story. They have not held that even sophisticated parties who have relied on fraudulent misrepresentations are bound by contract with a clear disclaimer and integration clause. In the cases in which the courts have supposedly done so, either the party seeking to uphold the contract did not make any fraudulent misrepresentations or the other party did not rely on them or the case could as easily have been decided on other grounds.","PeriodicalId":405630,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Contract Litigation","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Freedom to Mislead: The Fictitious Freedom to Contract Around Fraud Under Delaware Law\",\"authors\":\"Hao Jiang\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2815380\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the past 15 years, Delaware courts seem to have created a rule that allowed sophisticated parties to contract around fraud by using an unambiguous disclaimer and integration clause. Supposedly, an extra-contractual fraud claim would be dismissed had there been an unambiguous disclaimer. However, a survey of Delaware cases tells a different story. They have not held that even sophisticated parties who have relied on fraudulent misrepresentations are bound by contract with a clear disclaimer and integration clause. In the cases in which the courts have supposedly done so, either the party seeking to uphold the contract did not make any fraudulent misrepresentations or the other party did not rely on them or the case could as easily have been decided on other grounds.\",\"PeriodicalId\":405630,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"LSN: Contract Litigation\",\"volume\":\"38 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-05-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"LSN: Contract Litigation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2815380\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Contract Litigation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2815380","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在过去的15年里,特拉华州的法院似乎创造了一种规则,允许老练的当事人通过使用明确的免责声明和整合条款来规避欺诈。据推测,如果有明确的免责声明,合同外欺诈索赔将被驳回。然而,对特拉华州案例的调查却告诉我们一个不同的故事。他们没有认为,即使是依靠欺诈性虚假陈述的老练当事人也受到带有明确免责和整合条款的合同的约束。在法院应该这样做的案件中,要么寻求维持合同的一方没有作出任何欺诈性的虚假陈述,要么另一方没有依赖这些虚假陈述,要么案件可以很容易地根据其他理由作出裁决。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Freedom to Mislead: The Fictitious Freedom to Contract Around Fraud Under Delaware Law
In the past 15 years, Delaware courts seem to have created a rule that allowed sophisticated parties to contract around fraud by using an unambiguous disclaimer and integration clause. Supposedly, an extra-contractual fraud claim would be dismissed had there been an unambiguous disclaimer. However, a survey of Delaware cases tells a different story. They have not held that even sophisticated parties who have relied on fraudulent misrepresentations are bound by contract with a clear disclaimer and integration clause. In the cases in which the courts have supposedly done so, either the party seeking to uphold the contract did not make any fraudulent misrepresentations or the other party did not rely on them or the case could as easily have been decided on other grounds.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信