In Jan 19 class, we will discuss the formation issues of contract. I would like to add one more reading from
p364 to p370 in "An Inquiry into Several Difficult Problems in Enacting China's Uniform Contract Law."
Attached is the article. The author of the original article is Professor Wang Liming, who is now the Dean of
Renmin University of China School of Law. He was intimately involved in the drafting of the Contract law as a
National people Congress deputy when the PRC Civil Law was enacted in 1999. "Unified Contract Law" in this
article is the same meaning of "PRC Contract Law" (PCL).
As follows, we have some question need to be discussed in the next two sessions:
1. Can an offer, specifying a period for acceptance or not, be revoked under PCL, ROC Civil Code (RCC) and
Japan Civil Code (JCC)? Please read PCL para.18-19, RCC para154-158, JCC art.521.
2. As a general rule (PCL art.25, CISG art.23), a contract is concluded at the moment of an acceptance of an offer
becomes effective. However, does an acceptance of an offer become effective at the moment "the notice of
declaration of intention" (the indication of assent) reaches the offeror or at the moment the notice of declaration of
intention is placed in the mail box? What is the rule in PCL (art.26), RCC (art.95 para.2), and JCC (art526 para2
and art.521 para.2)? What difference between Japan and China, and between China and the US contract law?
3. Did the PCL (art.30-31), RCC (art.153; art.160 para.2), and JCC (art.528) adopted the approach set forth in UCC
Sec. 2-207, CISG art.19 and UNIDROIT principles art. 2.11?