摘要
以祖国大陆《旅游法》的制定与实施为标志,旅游合同于祖国大陆终于实现了规范化。而将其与1999年我国台湾地区"民法"新增有关旅游合同之法规则进行对比,可发现二者在总的立法体例、主要规制的内容上有很大的相似性,但在缔约双方一些具体权利义务的分配上仍有差异。如祖国大陆《旅游法》所规定的旅行社告知义务内容的明文化、因旅游者原因所产生合同解除权的列举式立法、旅游合同违约无过错责任原则的缓和、惩罚性损害赔偿的引入;我国台湾地区"民法"债编规定的旅行社对旅游者购物瑕疵之协助及处理义务。而这些细微的差别也为两岸旅游合同法的相互借鉴与改进预留了空间。
It is the publication and enforcement of tourism law in China's Mainland that marks the achievement of typification of tourism contract at last. Comparing this law with the rules on tourism contract in Taiwan region which was made and added to civil code in 1999, we can find they are similar to each other in legislative style and main content. But the distribution of rights and obligations held by the two parts of tourism contract, namely travel agency and tourists is different. For example, the special place of China's Mainland tourism law is reflected in the following four points. To be detailed, we should pay attention to the clear stipulation on the travel agency＇ s obligation to disclose; the clear enumeration of right of cancellation on contracts just because the cause of tourists ; the relaxing of the principle of liability without fault on the breaking of tourism contract; introduction of punitive damage . Also we should concentrate on the special stipulation of tourism contract in Taiwan region＇ s civil code, especially for the content of the obligation to help by travel agency when tourists buy defective commodities in designated shopping mall. In a word, the existence of these subtle distinctions in law about tourism contract can leave space for China's Mainland and Taiwan region to learn from each other in order to perfect their rules.
出处
《西南政法大学学报》
2014年第2期47-55,共9页
Journal of Southwest University of Political Science and Law
关键词
旅游法
包价旅游合同
有名化
附随义务
惩罚性损害赔偿
tourism law
organized travel contract
typification
contractual collateral obligation
punitive damage
