您的位置: 首页 » 法律资料网 » 法律法规 »

CONTROL OF EXEMPTION CLAUSES ORDINANCE

作者:法律资料网 时间:2024-06-17 00:19:06  浏览:8644   来源:法律资料网
下载地址: 点击此处下载

CONTROL OF EXEMPTION CLAUSES ORDINANCE ——附加英文版

Hong Kong


CONTROL OF EXEMPTION CLAUSES ORDINANCE
 (CHAPTER 71)
 CONTENTS
  
  ion
  I    PRELIMINARY
  hort title
  nterpretation and application
  he "reasonableness" test
  Dealing as consumer"
  arieties of exemption clause
  ower to amend Schedules 1 and 2
  II    CONTROL OF EXEMPTION CLAUSES
  dance of liability for negligence, breach of contract, etc.
  egligence liability
  iability arising in contract
  nreasonable indemnity clauses Liability arising from sale or
supply of
  s
  "Guarantee" of consumer goods
  Seller's liability
  Miscellaneous contracts under which goods pass Other provisions
about
  racts
  Effect of breach on "reasonableness" test
  Evasion by means of secondary contract
  Arbitration agreements
  III   CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE CONTROL DOES NOT APPLY
  International supply contracts
  Choice of law clauses
  Saving for other relevant legislation
  Application
  IV    CONSEQUENTIAL AND OTHER AMENDMENTS
  (Omitted)
  dule 1. Scope of sections 7, 8, 9 and 12
  dule 2. "Guidelines" for application of reasonableness test
  dule 3. (Omitted)
 Whole document
  
  imit the extent to which civil liability for breach of contract, 
or
  negligence or other breach of duty, can be avoided by 
means of
  ract terms and otherwise; and to restrict the 
enforceability of
  tration agreements. [1 December 1990] L. N. 38 of 1990
 PART I PRELIMINARY
  
  hort title
  Ordinance may be cited as the Control of Exemption Clauses
Ordinance.
  nterpretation and application
  In this Ordinance--
  iness" includes a profession and the activities of a public 
body, a
  ic authority, or a board, commission, committee or 
other body
  inted by the Governor or Government;
  ds" has the same meaning as in the Sale of Goods Ordinance (Cap.
26);
  ligence" means the breach--
  of any obligation, arising from the express or implied terms 
of a
  ract, to take reasonable care or exercise reasonable skill 
in the
  ormance of the contract;
  of any common law duty to take reasonable care or exercise 
reasonable
  l (but not any stricter duty);
  of the common duty of care imposed by the Occupiers 
Liability
  nance (Cap. 314); "notice" includes an announcement, whether or
not in
  hing, and any other communication or pretended communication;
  sonal injury" includes any disease and any impairment of 
physical or
  al condition.
  In the case of both contract and tort, sections 7 to 12 apply 
(except
  e the contrary is stated in section 11 (4)) only to 
business
  ility, that is liability for breach of obligations or duties
arising--
  from things done or omitted to be done by a person in the course
of a
  ness (whether his own business or another's); or
  from the occupation of premises used for business purposes 
of the
  pier, and references to liability are to be read 
accordingly; but
  ility of an occupier of premises for breach of an obligation or 
duty
  rds a person obtaining access to the premises for 
recreational or
  ational purposes, being liability for loss or damage 
suffered by
  on of the dangerous state of the premises, is not a business
liability
  he occupier unless granting that person such access for the 
purposes
  erned falls within the business purposes of the occupier.
  In relation to any breach of duty or obligation, it is 
immaterial
  her the breach was inadvertent or intentional, or whether 
liability
  it arises directly or vicariously.
  1977 c. 50 ss. 1&14 U. K.]
  he "reasonableness" test
  In relation to a contract term, the requirement of reasonableness 
for
  purposes of this Ordinance and section 4 of the 
Misrepresentation
  nance (Cap. 284) is satisfied only if the court or 
arbitrator
  rmines that the term was a fair and reasonable one to be 
included
  ng regard to the circumstances which were, or ought reasonably
to have
  , known to or in the contemplation of the parties when the 
contract
  made.
  In determining for the purposes of section 11 or 12 whether a
contract
  satisfies the requirement of reasonableness, the court or 
arbitrator
  l have regard in particular to the matters specified in 
Schedule 2;
  this subsection does not prevent the court or arbitrator from
holding,
  ccordance with any rule of law, that a term which purports to 
exclude
  estrict any relevant liability is not a term of the contract.
  
  In relation to a notice (not being a notice having 
contractual
  ct), the requirement of reasonableness under this 
Ordinance is
  sfied only if the court or arbitrator determines that it would
be fair
  reasonable to allow reliance on it, having regard to 
all the
  umstances obtaining when the liability arose or (but for the 
notice)
  d have arisen.
  In determining (under this Ordinance or the 
Misrepresentation
  nance (Cap. 284)) whether a contract term or notice 
satisfies the
  irement of reasonableness, the court or arbitrator shall have 
regard
  articular (but without prejudice to subsection (2) to whether
(and, if
  to what extent) the language in which the term or notice is 
expressed
  language understood by the person as against whom another 
person
  s to rely upon the term or notice.
  Where by reference to a contract term or notice a person 
seeks to
  rict liability to a specified sum of money, and the question
arises
  er this Ordinance or the Misrepresentation Ordinance (Cap. 
284))
  her the term or notice satisfies the requirement of 
reasonableness,
  court or arbitrator shall have regard in particular (but 
without
  udice to subsection (2) or (4)) to--
  the resources which he could expect to be available to him for 
the
  ose of meeting the liability should it arise; and
  how far it was open to him to cover himself by insurance.
  It is for the person claiming that a contract term or notice
satisfies
  requirement of reasonableness to prove that it does.
  1977 c. 50 s. 11 U. K.]
  Dealing as consumer"
  A party to a contract "deals as consumer" in relation to another
party
  
  he neither makes the contract in the course of a business nor 
holds
  elf out as doing so;
  the other party does make the contract in the course of a 
business;
  
  in the case of a contract governed by the law of sale of goods 
or by
  ion 12, the goods passing under or in pursuance of the contract
are of
  pe ordinarily supplied for private use or consumption.
  Notwithstanding subsection (1), on a sale by auction or by
competitive
  er the buyer is not in any circumstances to be regarded as dealing 
as
  umer.
  It is for the person claiming that a party does not deal as 
consumer
  rove that he does not.
  1977 c. 50 s. 12 U. K.]
  
  arieties of exemption clause
  To the extent that this Ordinance prevents the 
exclusion  or
  riction of any liability it also prevents--
  making the liability or its enforcement subject to 
restrictive or
  ous conditions;
  excluding or restricting any right or remedy in respect 
of the
  ility, or subjecting a person to any prejudice in consequence of 
his
  uing any such right or remedy;
  excluding or restricting rules of evidence or procedure, and (to 
that
  nt) sections 7, 10, 11 and 12 also prevent excluding or 
restricting
  ility by reference to terms and notices which  exclude  or 
restrict
  relevant obligation or duty.
  An agreement in writing to submit present or future 
differences to
  tration is not to be treated under this Ordinance as 
excluding or
  ricting any liability. [cf. 1977 c. 50 s. 13 U. K.]
  ower to amend Schedules 1 and 2
  Legislative Council may by resolution amend Schedules 1 and 2.
 PART II CONTROL OF EXEMPTION CLAUSES
  
  dance of liability for negligence, breach of contract, etc.
  egligence liability
  A person cannot by reference to any contract term or to a notice
given
  ersons generally or to particular persons exclude or 
restrict his
  ility for death or personal injury resulting from negligence.
  In the case of other loss or damage, a person cannot so 
exclude or
  rict his liability for negligence except in so far as the 
term or
  ce satisfies the requirement of reasonableness.
  Where a contract term or notice purports to exclude or 
restrict
  ility for negligence a person's agreement to or awareness of it
is not
  tself to be taken as indicating his voluntary acceptance of any
risk.
  1977 c. 50 s. 2 U. K.]
  iability arising in contract
  This section applies as between contracting parties where one of 
them
  s as consumer or on the other's written standard terms of
business.
  As against that party, the other cannot by reference to any 
contract
  --
  When himself in breach of contract, exclude or restrict any 
liability
  is in respect of the breach; or
  claim to be entitled--
  to render a contractual performance substantially different from 
that
  h was reasonably expected of him; or
  in respect of the whole or any part of his contractual obligation,
to
  er no performance at all,
  pt in so far as (in any of the cases mentioned above 
in this
  ection) the contract term satisfies the requirement of
reasonableness.
  1977 c. 50 s. 3 U. K.]
  nreasonable indemnity clauses
  A person dealing as consumer cannot by reference to any contract 
term
  ade to indemnify another person (whether a party to the 
contract or
  in respect of liability that may be incurred by the 
other for
  igence or breach of contract, except in so far as the contract 
term
  sfies the requirement of reasonableness.
  This section applies whether the liability in question--
  is directly that of the person to be indemnified or is incurred
by him
  riously;
  is to the person dealing as consumer or to someone else. [cf. 1977 
c.
  . 4 U. K.]
  ility arising from sale or supply of goods
  
  "Guarantee" of consumer goods
  In the case of goods of a type ordinarily supplied for private
use or
  umption, where loss or damage--
  arises from the goods proving defective while in consumer use;
and
  results from the negligence of a person concerned in the 
manufacture
  istribution of the goods, liability for the loss or damage 
cannot be
  uded or restricted by reference to any contract term or 
notice
  ained in or operating by reference to a guarantee of the goods.
  For these purposes--
  goods are to be regarded as "in consumer use" when a person is 
using
  , or has them in his possession for use, otherwise than 
exclusively
  the purposes of a business; and
  anything in writing is a guarantee if it contains or 
purports to
  ain some promise or assurance (however worded or 
presented) that
  cts will be made good by complete or partial replacement, 
or by
  ir, monetary compensation or otherwise.
  This section does not apply as between the parties to a contract
under
  n pursuance of which possession or ownership of the goods passed.
  1977 c. 50 s. 5 U. K.]
  Seller's liability
  Liability for breach of the obligations arising from section 14
of the
  of Goods Ordinance (Cap. 26) (seller's implied undertakings 
as to
  e, etc.) cannot be excluded or restricted by reference to any
contract
  .
  As against a person dealing as consumer, liability for breach of 
the
  gations arising from section 15, 16 or 17 of the Sale of 
Goods
  nance (Cap. 26) (seller's implied undertakings as to 
conformity of
  s with description or sample, or as to their quality or fitness
for a
  icular purpose) cannot be excluded or restricted by reference to 
any
  ract term.
  As against a person dealing otherwise than as consumer, the 
liability
  ified in subsection (2) can be excluded or restricted by reference 
to
  ntract term, but only in so far as the term satisfies the 
requirement
  easonableness.
  The liabilities referred to in this section are not only the 
business
  ilities defined by section 2 (2), but include those arising under 
any
  ract of sale of goods. [cf. 1977 c. 50 s. 6 U. K.]
  Miscellaneous contracts under which goods pass
  Where the possession or ownership of goods passes 
under or in
  uance of a contract not governed by the law of sale of 
goods,
  ection (2) to (4) apply in relation to the effect (if any) that 
the
  t or arbitrator is to give to contract terms excluding or 
restricting
  ility for breach of obligation arising by implication of law from 
the
  re of the contract.
  As against a person dealing as consumer, liability in respect of 
the
  's correspondence with description or sample, or their 
quality or
  ess for any particular purpose, cannot be excluded or 
restricted by
  rence to any such term.
  As against a person dealing otherwise than as consumer, that
liability
  be excluded or restricted by reference to such a term, but only
in so
  as the term satisfies the requirement of reasonableness.
  
  Liability in respect of--
  the right to transfer ownership of the goods, or give possession;
or
  the assurance of quiet possession to a person taking 
goods in
  uance of the contract, cannot be excluded or restricted by 
reference
  ny such term except in so far as the term satisfies the requirement
of
  onableness. [cf. 1977 c. 50 s. 7 U. K.]
  r provisions about contracts
  Effect of breach on "reasonableness" test
  Where for reliance upon it a contract term has to 
satisfy the
  irement of reasonableness, it may be found to do so and be 
given
  ct accordingly notwithstanding that the contract has been 
terminated
  er by breach or by a party electing to treat it as repudiated.
  Where on a breach the contract is nevertheless affirmed by a 
party
  tled to treat as repudiated, this does not of itself 
exclude the
  irement of reasonableness in relation to any contract term.
  1977 c. 50 s. 9 U. K.]
  Evasion by means of secondary contract
  rson is not bound by any contract term prejudicing or taking 
away
  ts of his which arise under, or in connection with the performance
of,
  her contract, so far as those rights extend to the 
enforcement of
  her's liability which this Ordinance prevents that 
other  from
  uding or restricting.
  1977 c. 50 s. 10 U. K.]
  Arbitration agreements
  As against a person dealing as consumer, an agreement to submit
future
  erences to arbitration cannot be enforced except--
  with his written consent signified after the differences in 
question
  arisen; or
  where he has himself had recourse to arbitration in pursuance of 
the
  ement in respect of any differences.
  Subsection (1) does not affect--
  the enforcement of an international arbitration agreement 
within the
  ing of section 2 (1) of the Arbitration Ordinance (Cap. 341);
  laced 76 of 1990 s. 2)
  the resolution of differences arising under any contract so far
as it
  by virtue of Schedule 1, excluded from the operation of section
7, 8,
  12.
 PART III CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE CONTROL DOES NOT APPLY
  
  International supply contracts
  The limits imposed by this Ordinance on the extent to which a 
person
  exclude or restrict liability by reference to a contract term do 
not
  y to liability arising under an international supply contract.
  The terms of an international supply contract are not subject to 
any
  irement of reasonableness under section 8 or 9.
  For the purposes of this section, an international supply 
contract
  s a contract--
  that is either a contract of sale of goods or a contract under 
or in
  uance of which the possession or ownership of goods passes;
  that is made by parties whose places of business (or, if they 
have
  , habitual residences) are in the territories of different 
States or
  in and outside Hong Kong; and
  in the case of which--
  the goods in question are, at the time of the conclusion 
of the
  ract, in the course of carriage, or will be carried, 
from the
  itory of one State to the territory of another, or to or from 
Hong
  from or to a place outside Hong Kong; or
  the acts constituting the offer and acceptance have been done in 
the
  itories of different States or in and outside Hong Kong; or
  ) the contract provides for the goods to be delivered to the
territory
  State other than that within whose territory the acts 
constituting
  offer and acceptance were done; or
  the acts constituting the offer and acceptance were done in Hong
Kong
  the contract provides for the goods to be delivered outside Hong
Kong;
  
  the acts constituting the offer and acceptance were done outside 
Hong
  and the contract provides for the goods to be delivered to Hong
Kong.
  1977 c. 50 s. 26 U. K.]
  Choice of law clauses
  Where the proper law of a contract is the law of Hong Kong only 
by
  ce of the parties (and apart from that choice would be the law
of some
  r country) sections 7 to 12 do not operate as part of the proper
law.
  This Ordinance has effect notwithstanding any contract 
term which
  ies or purports to apply the law of some other country, where 
(either
  oth)--
  the term appears to the court or arbitrator to have been 
imposed
  ly or mainly for the purpose of enabling the party imposing 
it to
  e the operation of this Ordinance; or
  in the making of the contract one of the parties dealt as 
consumer,
  he was then habitually resident in Hong Kong, and the essential 

不分页显示   总共2页  1 [2]

  下一页

下载地址: 点击此处下载

关于燃气燃烧器具安装、维修企业资质管理有关事项的通知

建设部


关于燃气燃烧器具安装、维修企业资质管理有关事项的通知

建城[2007]250号


各省、自治区建设厅,直辖市建委(市政管委),新疆生产建设兵团建设局:

  根据《建筑业企业资质管理规定》(建设部令第159号)的有关规定,现将燃气燃烧器具安装、维修企业资质管理有关事项通知如下:

  一、燃气燃烧器具安装、维修企业资质纳入建筑业企业资质管理。

  二、省、自治区人民政府建设主管部门和直辖市人民政府燃气主管部门,负责本行政区域内燃气燃烧器具安装、维修企业资质的监督管理工作。

  设区的市人民政府燃气主管部门具体实施燃气燃烧器具安装、维修企业资质许可,并负责本行政区域内燃气燃烧器具安装、维修企业资质的监督管理工作。

  三、对符合下列资质标准的燃气燃烧器具安装、维修企业,由设区的市人民政府燃气主管部门核发相应的《建筑业企业资质证书》,资质证书管理纳入《建筑业企业资质证书》管理体系:

  (一)企业的注册资本不少于30万元。

  (二)有固定的经营场所,配置与经营规模相适应的抢修、维修服务通讯工具、专用车辆。

  (三)有公开的安装、报修、维修、抢修等工作流程及服务电话,且有24小时值班人员。

  (四)有必备的燃气燃烧器具安装、维修设备、工具和仪器:

  1.与安装管道相匹配的钻孔设备、机械绞丝设备;


  2.常用的工具和维修用的零配件;

  3.能直接检测燃气压力、流量,水压、水量、温度等主要检修、调试指标的专用仪器;


  4.燃气检漏仪及泄漏浓度报警器;


  5.其他必备的燃气燃烧器具安装、维修设备、工具和仪器。

  (五)配备4名以上具有工程、经济、会计等初级以上(含初级)专业技术职称的人员,其中燃气或相关专业的人员不少于1名并具有助理工程师(含助理工程师)以上的专业技术职称。

  (六)有4名以上持有燃气行业《职业技能岗位证书》的安装、维修作业人员。

  (七)有按照国家或地方的相关法律、法规、技术标准(规范、规程)及其它相关规定要求制定的作业标准。

  (八)有完善的安全管理、质量管理、文书档案管理制度,对所承接的业务依照有关标准,建立了严格的检验制度和质量保修制度。

  (九)有完善的客户服务制度和服务标准。

  (十)有与燃气燃烧器具生产厂家签定的《安装、维修委托书》。

  四、申请燃气燃烧器具安装、维修企业资质应当提交的材料由省、自治区、直辖市人民政府建设(燃气)主管部门根据《建筑业企业资质管理规定》(建设部令第159号)和本通知的规定确定。

  五、燃气燃烧器具安装、维修企业应当遵守《建筑业企业资质管理规定》的有关规定。

中华人民共和国建设部
二〇〇七年十月三十一日

民营企业常见法律风险与防范

一、企业设立阶段因企业组织形式不规范导致风险
企业组织形式有多种:有限责任公司、股份有限公司、合伙企业、个人独资企业等等,分别受《公司法》、《合伙企业法》、《个人独资企业法》等的调整,民营企业投资人因为不了解各种组织形式各自的法律特征,常常导致投资人认识与法律规范之间的错位,因而产生始料不及的纠纷和法律风险。
实践中常见的有:
1、实际上是合伙企业,投资人却误以为设立和经营的是公司。导致合伙人之间对权利认知错位,合伙人对外无限责任与有限责任的认识错位。
2、自以为设立和经营的是有限公司,实际上是个人独资企业。“夫妻公司”“父子公司”以及新公司法实施后的“一人公司”是实践中常见的民营企业组织形式。投资人误以为“公司是我的,公司的财产也就是我的”,经营中将公司财产与家庭或个人财产混为一体,结果对外发生纠纷的时候可能招致公司人格的丧失,失去“有限责任”的保护,《公司法》第六十四条就明确规定“一人有限责任公司的股东不能证明公司财产独立于股东自己财产的,应当对公司债务承担连带责任”。
3、“影子”公司
出于种种原因,公司的实际出资人与公司登记股东不一致。登记股东相当于实际出资人的“影子”。这种公司在“身子”与“影子”因为情势变更不再默契的时候,往往会出现外部责任承担和内部利益分配方面的纠纷和法律风险。
4、不规范的所谓“集团公司”
民营企业家在具备一定的实力后,因为种种因素的考虑,开始朝集团化方向发展,但是没有注意企业集团组织的规范化,没有在法律上确立“集团”成员之间的资金、财务、人事、业务等等关系,导致“集团”人格的虚化,甚至“集团”成员管理的混乱,进而对“集团”核心企业造成重大不良影响。
5、不规范的“联营企业”
民营企业解决资金需求的一个常见办法就是拉朋友或其他公司合作联营,但是他人因不了解或不放心民营企业的前景,不愿意承担经营风险,于是公司老板就许诺对方,只要投资做公司股东,可以按照固定比例收取收益,不参与经营,也不承担公司经营风险和其他债务。这在法律上会被定性“名为联营实为借贷”,因为我国法律不允许企业之间的借贷,届时将导致行为无效的后果;而同时,当公司出现双方意料之外的亏损或赢利的时候,为亏损的承担和利润的享受,往往产生纠纷。
6、公司注册资本瑕疵
公司设立时,为了体现“实力”,有些民营企业家往往希望放大注册资本,可因为资金不足或考虑公司业务一时不需要那么多资金,于是采用虚报注册资本或注册后抽逃出资的手段。则可能面临的法律风险可能是:填补出资、公司人格否定、构成犯罪等等。
7、公司治理结构不科学、不规范
公司章程是公司的“宪法”,公司设立时就应在公司章程中明确设计好未来公司的治理结构。很多民营企业往往不重视公司章程设计,不重视公司治理结构,经营中往往出现小股东权益得不到保护,或者大股东良好的公司管理意图得不到贯彻,甚至陷入公司僵局等。

二、企业运营阶段因为风险管理缺失导致风险
企业作为市场主体,在复杂的市场环境中,无时不刻面临各种各样的风险。民营企业投资人的风险意识和风险应对能力往往依赖于从自身的创业实践中积累;因为市场受各种经济的、社会的、政治的、文化的、风俗习惯的因素影响,缺乏风险评估、管理、控制的规范,仅靠企业家个人的治理,必然难以避免应对不及的法律风险。
实践中常发生的有:
1、融资中的法律风险
企业经营中出现资金不足,是多数企业都会遇到的情形,常见的融资方式由银行借贷、民间借贷、股东追加投资、吸收新股东增资扩股、引进战略投资者、发行公司债券、上市融资(IPO或增发股票)等等。
资金借贷可能存在资金安排不当,不能按期还款,资金链断裂,导致信用危机等等风险。不同的融资方式还存在不同的法律风险,一次融资在不同环节有不同法律风险。
比如银行借贷,可能陷入“高利转贷”、“违法发放贷款”、“贷款诈骗”及其他金融诈骗的法律风险黑洞;民间借贷,可能遭遇“非法吸收公众存款”、“集资诈骗”、“票据诈骗”或其他金融凭证诈骗等等法律风险;股东追加投资和吸收新股东增资扩股,也会遇到股权结构和治理结构调整,利益分配的约定等等问题;引进战略投资者对法律风险的评估与防范要求更高,否则,掉进法律陷阱,导致辛苦创业培养的企业控制权旁落,对企业家心理和利益方面的打击都可能是惨重的。发行公司债券和股票,国家有着规范和严格的规则和制度,对法律风险控制的要求极高,需要专业人士进行系统的规划和辅导。若无视这些规范和要求,则可能踩进“擅自发行股票、公司、企业债券罪”的泥坑。
企业要做大做强免不了各种形式的融资或资本运作,在融资项目管理中注入法律风险管理的理念,对于法律风险的防范起着至关重要的作用。
2、人力资源利用中的风险
进入二十一世纪,人力资源对企业发展的作用已突显到异常重要的程度。但人力资源的引进、利用、培养、管理、淘汰整个过程中同样处处存在法律风险。
比如,民营企业为了节约成本、缩短培养过程、迅速抢上新项目等,常常采用“挖墙脚”的方法引进高级人才,并直接利用这些人从原东家带来的技术资料、客户信息等等,这就可能遭遇被挖企业的索赔,或遭致被挖企业的商业秘密、专利等侵权指控。
反过来,辛辛苦苦或花大代价培养的人才无端流失,被挖墙脚,企业却不能得到应有的补偿,也是民营企业常遇到的风险。
因为劳动关系,一个人具有了企业职工的身份,他的一些行为将由企业来承担其法律后果,因此,对职工的风险教育和行为约束不够,也会给企业带来不可预知的风险。比如职务行为侵权等等。
而劳资关系处理不当造成的法律风险更是平常。
因此,人力资源管理同样需要注入法律风险管理的这一重要内容。
3、市场交易中的法律风险
企业的发展靠的是不断发生的市场交易行为,不同的市场交易行为,需要确立不同的合同关系,不同的合同关系可能遭遇不同的法律陷阱。
事实上,企业最常遇到的法律纠纷就是合同纠纷。民营企业对于合同风险的意识相对来说还是较强的。但企业交易行为管理,绝不仅限于合同书本身的管理,一个合同关系既包含了作为主要权利义务界定标准的合同书,还包含着从订约谈判开始,直到合约履行完毕,乃至善后的持续过程。因此,交易行为的法律管理,实际上是一种过程管理。我们都知道,合同书中明确写明的合同义务必须履行,否则会遭到违约索赔;但对于“前合同义务”、“后合同义务”往往并不了解,也往往因此导致纠纷和损失。
民营企业家还有一个与法律管理相矛盾的传统观念,就是习惯于熟人圈子的交易,往往依赖个人信用关系进行交易。这样就带来两大风险:一是可能“知人知面不知心”,因为对人的认知错误,或者对方因情势变化而信用发生变化,导致“君子协定”和朋友关系一同被践踏;二是因为没有书面的对各自权利义务的具体约定,时间久了,双方对当初的细节问题产生误会,各自认知不同、理解不同,两个本来交情很好的交易伙伴和事业盟友因此发生纠纷。
因为市场准入制度的存在,很多交易行为还得考察交易对象的适格性,跟一个根本没有交易资格的人去交易,其风险可想而知。
4、对外投资中的法律风险
现代企业除了依靠自身的生产和经营进行赢利外,实力较雄厚的企业还要进行对外投资,以便从进入其他赢利能力较强或发展前景较好的领域,分得其中一杯羹,或者通过投资控制别人已经建立良好基础的经济实体。
对外投资的方式很多,常见的有设立新的项目公司或经济实体、参股他人已设立的公司、并购他人控制的公司、收购其他公司的项目或资产、为别人提供融资等等。
每一次对外投资都既是一个商业项目,也是一个法律项目。很多投资失败是因为缺乏项目法律管理或项目法律管理质量不高导致的。很多民营企业家认为,法律管理在项目中的作用就是草拟合同书,忽视了项目本身系统性、流程性的特点;正是因为这些特点,项目法律管理也是一项系统的、全流程的工作。
5、行政管理方面的法律风险
企业是一个市场主体,也是一个行政管理法律主体,是行政管理的相对人。企业的各种市场行为、社会活动都要受到行政法律法规规章的管制;企业也因此具有各种行政法上的权利和义务。有权利义务的地方就有法律风险。
企业要满足工商行政管理的要求,在企业登记、企业经营、企业解散过程中,必须依法遵章行为,否则就产生法律风险,遭致行政处罚等不同法律后果。比如虚假出资、抽逃出资,这是很多民营企业实际存在的问题,如没有出资前对出资的规划和出资后对资金的合法运作,企业极易踩如雷区,而一旦雷炸,轻则工商行政罚款,重则构成犯罪。
企业是纳税人,必须依法纳税;但有人戏称:中国民营企业十家至少有九家存在税务问题。这又是一个可怕的地雷,埋在那儿,你不知道什么时候爆炸。而一旦爆炸,往往致命。
安全生产管理在这些年可谓风暴频行,但每年依然不断出现安全事故,于职工生命、于企业利润都是极大风险。很多的真实案例依然鲜血淋漓在眼前。
企业的产品质量风险更无须多说,三鹿奶粉事件一夜之间让一家巨型企业灭顶,还几乎毁掉一个行业。国家对产品质量监督管理也将更加严苛。
还有环保问题可能导致的索赔、处罚。等等等等。
政府管理部门现在强调依法行政,依法管理。很多民营企业家还抱着过去那种注重跟政府官员关系,不注重合法合规经营的观念,就会给自己的企业埋下各种法律风险的地雷。