Depriving the Debtor’s Essential Obligation of its Substance and its Remedies under the Provisions of Article 1170 of the French Civil Code
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1994 and thereafter, the French judiciary set a trend by utilizing the causation theory to revoke the exemption clauses of liability that constitute a violation of the contract’s essential obligations. This utilization was intended to restore economic equilibrium to the contract, in order to achieve the benefit each party seeks from concluding a contract. However, in 2016, the new amendments of the French civil code -which were issued by decree no: 131-2016- abolished the causation theory in general. Nevertheless, they retained the previous French judicial trend based on causation theory, where Article 1170 of the new amendments states clearly “any contract term which deprives a debtor’s essential obligation of its substance is deemed not written”. However, Article 1170 of the new amendments did not specify what is meant by an essential obligation? When does the contract’s term result in depriving the debtor’s essential obligation of its substance? Moreover, Article 1170 consolidates an individual penalty which may cause many legal problems. These problems are: the matter concerns an essential clause in the contract and not a secondary one, the other clauses of the contract remain valid as they have been, without any modifications or replacements and, in some cases, abolishing the clause itself might lead to further imbalance in the contract. Therefore, the legal provisions of Article 1170 should be analyzed in an analytical approach along with the previous French judicial trend with respect to these provisions. As a result, the research illustrates the urgent need to amend Article 1170 of the new amendments, in order to contribute to the stability of the economic contractual equilibrium.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".