🐝🌻小蜜蜂分享 合约法之美
中英对照 Reforming Contracts Act 1950 to ensure its relevance in digital era
改革1950年合约法以确保其法令在数字时代保持相关性
资料来源: https://theedgemalaysia.com/node/743664
改革1950年合约法以确保其法令在数字时代保持相关性
作者：Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera
2025年2月7日，下午3:47
（2月7日）马来西亚的《1950年合约法》作为我国契约法的基石，一直是法律和商业框架的重要支柱。该法基于普通法原则，为国内和国际商业交易提供了稳定的法律基础。然而，自其法令颁布以来，商业、科技和全球互动的格局已发生巨大变化。法律必须随社会发展而演进，我们的责任是确保管理合约的法律框架保持稳健、适应性强并具前瞻性。
改革的必要性
为什么需要进行审查？
合约本质上是商业和贸易的生命线。它们规范个人、企业和政府之间的协议，确保交易的可预测性、公平性和可执行性。然而，我们订立合约的方式已经发生了深刻变革：
- 商业数字化 —— 电子商务、数字合约、智能合约以及基于区块链的协议日益普及。“协议”和“签名”的传统定义正受到数字互动的挑战，亟需法律承认和明确。
- 跨境交易 —— 企业和个人日益签订超越国界的合约。全球化增加了合同关系的复杂性，因此需与国际最佳实践保持一致。
- 商业模式演变 —— 共享经济、订阅制服务以及非传统就业模式的兴起挑战了传统合同规范。法律必须认可这些新兴模式，以确保公平性和可执行性。
- 消费者保护与公平性 —— 企业需要法律确定性，同时消费者也需要法律保护，以防范不公平条款、隐藏条款及谈判权力的不对等。
- 科技颠覆 —— 人工智能和自动化决策为合同义务引入了新的维度。当AI系统签订协议时，谁应承担责任？在自动化合同中，如何定义“意图”？
- 不公平合约条款与显失公平 —— 合同关系中的权力不平衡可能导致剥削性条款。在许多司法管辖区，“显失公平”（unconscionability）和不公平合约条款已获得更大关注，以确保议价能力较弱的一方不会被强加苛刻的条款。因此，马来西亚法律需要考虑如何更好地纳入这些保护措施。
- 合同法概念的演进 —— 传统上，“契约相对性”（privity of contract）原则限制了合同权利和义务仅适用于合同当事方。然而，现代商业环境需要更广泛的适用范围，尤其是当第三方受益人应当享有可执行的权利时。合同法是否应承认非合同方的权利 (non-contracting party rights)，是一个需要重新审视的重要课题。
上述问题并非全部待审查的内容，但我们必须认识到法律的确定性与商业的灵活性应当并行不悖。改革的目标不是让合约法变得更加复杂，而是确保其保持清晰、可执行，并且适应当代需求。
改革的指导原则
《1950年合约法》的审查可以遵循以下原则：
- 简洁性与可及性 —— 法律框架应当易于理解，并对企业、消费者和法律从业者都具有实际可操作性。过度复杂的法律条款可能会导致混淆，而非提供清晰指导。
- 适应性与技术相关性 —— 法律应具有足够的灵活性，以适应技术进步，同时在合同解释上提供法律确定性。
- 公平性与消费者保护 —— 合同自由固然重要，但必须有适当的保障措施，以防止剥削行为，并确保公平交易。
- 与国际最佳实践接轨 —— 作为全球经济的重要参与者，马来西亚的合同法应符合国际公认的原则，以确保跨境交易的顺畅，并促进法律的协调一致。
- 司法与立法清晰度 —— 任何改革都应确保法院在合同解释和争议解决机制上拥有明确的指引。
行动的呼吁
此次审查不应仅仅停留在学术层面，而应当成为奠定未来几十年商业、创业者和消费者运作基础的法律改革。改革必须在可预测性与创新性、稳定性与进步之间取得平衡。
我们今天所制定的法律，一旦立法通过，将塑造马来西亚未来数十年的法律和经济格局。现在正是现代化、加强和使《1950年合约法》面向未来的重要时刻，以确保其能够满足当下需求，并预见未来挑战。
拿督Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera法官是名联邦法院法官，本文章摘自他在“马来西亚《1950年合约法》审查委员会”会议上的开幕致辞，他亦担任该委员会主席。
Source: https://theedgemalaysia.com/node/743664
Reforming Contracts Act 1950 to ensure its relevance in digital era
By Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera
07 Feb 2025, 03:47 pm
(Feb 7): The Contracts Act 1950, which serves as the foundation of contractual law in Malaysia, has been a pillar of our legal and commercial framework. It is based on common law principles and has provided a stable foundation for business transactions, both domestic and international. However, it is also clear that the landscape of commerce, technology, and global interactions has changed dramatically since its enactment. Laws must evolve alongside society, and it is our duty to ensure that the legal framework governing contracts remains robust, adaptable, and forward-looking.
The need for reform
Why is this review necessary?
Contracts, by their very nature, are the lifeblood of commerce and trade. They govern agreements between individuals, businesses, and governments, ensuring predictability, fairness, and enforceability in transactions. Yet, the way we engage in contracts today has undergone profound transformation:
1. Digitalization of commerce — E-commerce, digital contracts, smart contracts, and blockchain-based agreements are increasingly common. The traditional definition of an "agreement" and "signature" has been challenged by digital interactions that demand legal recognition and clarity.
2. Cross-border transactions — Businesses and individuals are engaging in contracts that transcend national boundaries. Globalisation has increased the complexity of contractual relationships, requiring alignment with international best practices.
3. Evolving business models — The rise of the gig economy, subscription-based services, and non-traditional employment arrangements has challenged conventional contractual norms. The law must recognise these developments to ensure fairness and enforceability.
4. Consumer protection and fairness — While businesses need certainty, consumers also require protection against unfair contractual terms, hidden clauses, and asymmetries in bargaining power.
5. Technological disruptions — Artificial intelligence and automated decision-making have introduced new dimensions to contractual obligations. Who bears responsibility when an AI-driven system enters into an agreement? How do we define "intention" in the context of automated contracts?
6. Unfair contract terms and unconscionability — Power imbalances in contractual relationships can lead to exploitative terms. Concepts of unconscionability and unfair contract terms have gained prominence in many jurisdictions, ensuring that parties with weaker bargaining power are not unduly burdened by oppressive agreements. A review must consider how best to incorporate such protections into Malaysian law.
7. Evolving concepts in contract law — The doctrine of privity of contract has traditionally limited contractual rights and obligations to the contracting parties. However, modern commerce necessitates an expanded approach, particularly in cases where third-party beneficiaries ought to have enforceable rights. The recognition of non-contracting party rights is an area that demands reconsideration.
This is not an exhaustive list of issues that need to be looked at. We must recognise that legal certainty and commercial flexibility must go hand in hand. The goal is not to overcomplicate contract law but to ensure that it remains clear, enforceable, and relevant to contemporary needs.
Guiding principles for reform
A review of the Act could use the following guiding principles:
1. Simplicity and accessibility — Legal frameworks should be understandable and practical for businesses, consumers, and legal practitioners alike. Overly complex legal provisions may lead to confusion rather than clarity.
2. Adaptability and technological relevance — The law should be flexible enough to accommodate technological advancements while providing certainty in contractual interpretation.
3. Fairness and consumer protection — While freedom of contract is a fundamental principle, safeguards must be in place to prevent exploitation and ensure equitable dealings.
4. Alignment with international best practices — Malaysia is a key player in the global economy. Our contract law should reflect internationally recognised principles, ensuring smooth cross-border transactions and legal harmonisation.
5. Judicial and legislative clarity — Our reforms should ensure that courts have clear guidance on contractual interpretation and dispute resolution mechanisms.
A call to action
The review must not merely be an academic exercise. It should shape the legal foundation upon which businesses, entrepreneurs, and consumers will operate for decades to come. The reforms must strike a balance between predictability and innovation, stability and progress.
The laws we shape today, if legislated, will determine the legal and economic landscape of Malaysia for generations to come. This is our moment to modernise, enhance, and future-proof the Contracts Act to ensure that it meets the demands of the present while anticipating the needs of the future.
Justice Datuk Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera is a Federal Court Judge. This is an excerpt of his opening speech for the Committee to Review the Malaysian Contracts Act 1950, which he chairs.
