從羅馬法到19世紀危險負擔之法律發展

Legal Development of Risk-Assuming from Roman Law to the 19th Centur

危險負擔法則若廣義的理解為規範一方不須為原定給付義務之履行，他方是否仍須支付對價的問題，要件上，不限於不可歸責於雙方當事人之給付不能之情形，從歷史觀點，危險負擔法則乃集合三套具有不同歷史發展軌跡的制度。歐陸從羅馬法買受人負擔主義，歷經自然法所有人負擔主義，到現代主流的標的物交付主義，並非一成不變。買賣以外有名契約之危險負擔法則，集中在羅馬法所謂之租賃，包括現代法之物之租賃、承攬及僱傭。承攬工作物受領前，原則上由承攬人負擔危險。租賃及僱傭，一般而言，無法提出勞務或讓他方使用標的物之債務人，無法請求對價。我國民法以給付不能及歸責事由為核心的危險負擔一般規定，並非羅馬法以來歐陸法傳統，而為德國民法之繼受。

If the rules of risk-assuming is to be understood in a board sense, it regulate whether the other party is also absolved from the counter-performance, when one party is no longer obliged to perform, from a legal development point of view, this body of rules result from three entirely different historical trajectories. For the sales law, it started from Roman periculum est emptoris, through natural law theory that the owner bears risks, to the wide-accepted rule that risks pass when deliver of the subject of sale. For contracts other than sale, three different kinds of contracts deserver our attention: lease, employment contract and contract of works. Before the contracted work is accepted, in principle, the risk is borne by the contractor. Leasing and employment, generally speaking, the debtor who cannot offer labor or let others use the subject matter cannot ask for consideration. The general rule in Taiwan Civil Law regarding the risk-assuming, requiring the impossibility of performance has to be blamed by obligor, is not a continental law tradition since Roman law, but a successor to German civil law.