La “terminación” del contrato por causas intrínsecas y extrínsecas ¿Un régimen unitario o diferenciado de efectos? (Tema Central)
This paper addresses the question of the reasonableness of a unitary system of effects for contractual termination in a broad sense, encompassing both intrinsic and extrinsic causes. To this end, it undertakes a comparative analysis of the regulation of the effects of nullity and termination for bre...
| Autores: | , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2025 |
| País: | Ecuador |
| Institución: | Universidad Andina Simón Bolivar |
| Repositorio: | Repositorio Universidad Andina Simón Bolivar |
| Idioma: | español |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:repositorio.uasb.edu.ec:10644/10579 |
| Acceso en línea: | http://hdl.handle.net/10644/10579 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | CONTRATOS INCUMPLIMIENTO DE CONTRATO TÉRMINOS LEGALES DE CONTRATO DERECHO CIVIL RESCISION CONTRACT TERMINATION |
| Sumario: | This paper addresses the question of the reasonableness of a unitary system of effects for contractual termination in a broad sense, encompassing both intrinsic and extrinsic causes. To this end, it undertakes a comparative analysis of the regulation of the effects of nullity and termination for breach in two normative models: one “traditional”, the Civil Code of Bello, and the other “modern”, the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts. The conclusion suggests that maintaining a differentiated regime, as both texts do, is appropriate. Consequently, doctrinally supporting such a broad notion of “contractual termination” proves neither useful as a basis for a conceptual framework nor as a foundation for a normative regime. |
|---|