MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Brief Analysis on Cordiality and Credit Principle: Beginning with the Roman Law

2010· article· en· W1861549309 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bo-ping Ding

Bibliographic record

VenueCross-cultural communication · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Insolvency and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLawHonestyEconomicsValue (mathematics)PremiseLaw and economicsSociologyPolitical sciencePhilosophyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The cordiality and credit principle came forth in the Roman Law. “As criterions in the moral fields, cordiality and credit were embedded into the law system in the Roman Law.”Social and economic development in latter period of Roman republic were activators of the cordiality and credit principle. The Roman Law itself was a practical law. Only when a system became mature during practical evolution would the Roman Law endow it with a law vestment, thus was, by logic, induction and generalization, it was given the essence which was in accordance with human nature and in pursuit of eternal value, and possessed permanant vitality. This might be one of the reasons why the Roman Law could conquer the world. Cordiality and credit principle, which was borne due to Roman’s economic development, was established as the “monarch term”in many countries’ civil laws because they bore the pernamant values human beings were pursuing for, that was, fairness, honesty and promise. Cordiality and credit principle requires that people should be impartial; faithful ; promise-keeping and honest during marketing trade-off, that is, personal interests should be pursued under the premise of not harming other people and the society’s interests. Nowadays, applications of cordiality and credit principle are mostly reflected in contract-related laws. Agents concerned are required to carry out their responsibilities under the cordiality and credit principle and their behaviors should be dominated by this principle. All the actions during contract negociation, contract carry-out and the law officer’s realizing the agent concerned’s interests should be restricted within the principle. “The cordiality and credit principle becomes the criterion for judging whether or not the creditor’s behavior is legal ; thereby decisons are made on whether or not the creditor’s rights are abused”. In the following article, I’m going to talk about the development and functions of the cordiality and credit principle in the Roman Law and how the Roman applied it into their lives. Also, I’ll talk about the development of the cordiality and credit principle and its succession and application in China. Key Words: equality, honesty, credit Resume Le principe de loyaute et de credibilite provient de la loi de Rome. ‘‘L’implantation de la norme morale- loyaute et credibilite-dans la loi date de la loi de Rome’’, le developpement economique et social de Rome pendant la derniere periode de la Republique a servi de catalyseur a ce principe. La loi de Rome est en soi une loi pratique , ce n’est quand telle institution atteint la maturite que la Loi de Rome lui confere la force de loi, lui donnant une nature comforme a la nature humaine et a l’eternelle poursuite de la valeur par des moyens tels que l’induction, la synthese logiques, lui accordant de ce fait une vivacite durable. C’est peut-etre une des raisons pour la quelle la loi de Rome a reussi a conquerir le monde. En plus, le principe de loyaute et de credit ne du besoin du developpement economique de Rome peut etre generalement etabli comme ‘‘l’article souverain’’de la loi civile de tous les pays, c’est justement parce qu’il represente l’eternelle poursuite de la valeur de l’humanite, a savoir la poursuite des limites morales fondamentales de justice d’honnetete, de promess, ect. Dans l’economie de marche, le principe de loyaute et de credit nous demande de traiter d’egal a egal l’un l’autre, mettre l’accent sur la crediibilite, tenir a sa promesse, etre honnete et poursuivre ses propres profits sans porter atteinte aux interets d’autrui et de la societe. Actuellement, ce principe s’applique essentiellement dans les lois concernant le contrat, il demande aux parties interessees du contrat d’accomplir leur devoir suivant le principe de loyaute , credibilite et justice qui doit aussi regir leurs actions. La discussion et l’execution de contrat, le processus au cours duquel les agents judiciaires aident les parties concernees a realiser leurs droits sont tous lies par ce principe. ‘‘Le principe de lauyaute et de credibilite a devenu un critere de legalite des actions des creanciers qui determine si les actions des creanciers constituent l’abus des droits.’’ Dans le texte suivant, je ferais d’abord une breve presentation sur le developpement et le role du principe de loyaute et de credibilite dans la loi de Rome ; puis une simple analyse sur l’application de ce principe par les Romains et sa situation de developpement ; je traite enfin l’heritage et l’application de ce principe dans notre pays. Mots-cles: la loi universelle, la justice, la loyaute et la credibilite 摘 要 誠實信用原則產生于羅馬法。“誠實信用作為道德領域的規範植入法律的作法始於羅馬法”,共和國後期羅馬社會經濟發展的現實是滋生誠信原則的催化劑。羅馬法本身就是一個實踐性的法律,當某種制度在現實中發展成熟時,羅馬法才會賦予它法律的外衣,通過邏輯歸納概括等手段使其具有符合人類本性及永恆價值追求的本質,使其具有持久的生命力。這可能也是羅馬法能征服世界的原因之一。而產生於羅馬經濟發展需要的誠實信用原則能被普遍確立為各國民事法律的“帝王條款”,也正是因為這一條款所具有的人類永恆的價值追求,即對公平、誠實、諾言等基本道德界限的追求。在市場經濟交往中,誠實信用原則要求人們公平相待,講求信用,恪守諾言,誠實不欺,在不損害他人利益和社會利益的前提下追求自己的利益。目前對誠實信用原則的適用主要體現涉及合同的法律中,它要求合同當事人應該依誠信公平的原則履行義務,當事人的意思表示應該受該原則的支配。在合同談判階段、合同履行階段以及司法人員為當事人實現權利的階段都應該受到這一原則的約束。“誠實信用原則成為評價債權人行為是否合法的標準,從而確定債權人的行為是否構成權利的濫用”。在下面的文章中,我將對誠實信用原則在羅馬法的發展作用進行簡單介紹,並簡要分析羅馬人對這一原則的具體適用,以及誠實信用原則的發展狀況,最後談談誠實信用原則在我國的繼 承與適用。 關鍵詞:萬民法;公平;誠實信用

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.007
Scholarly communication0.0060.011
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.266 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCross-cultural communicationSame topicCorporate Insolvency and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207