La distinction entre contrats à exécution successive et contrats à exécution instantanée

The distinction between the successive execution agreements and the instantaneous execution agreements

• Auteur / Autrice : Marielle Picq
• Direction : Bruno Petit
• Type : Thèse de doctorat
• Discipline(s) : Droit privé
• Date : Soutenance en 1994
• Etablissement(s) : Grenoble 2

Mots clés

Mots clés contrôlés

Exécution (droit)

Mots clés libres

Droit prive

Droit civil responsabilite

Contrats

Contrat a execution successive

Cause

Indivisibilite

Contrat (execution)

Résumé

L'objet de cet ouvrage est de demontrer que la traditionnelle classification opposant les contrats a execution successive aux contrats a execution instantanee peut etre efficacement remplacee par la distinction entre les contrats divisibles et les contrats indivisibles. La premiere partie est relative aux interets de la distinction traditionnelle. Il ressort de cette etude que cette opposition est inapte a expliquer, de facon satisfaisante, les differences de regime juridique constatees et annoncees, qu'il s'agisse des mecanismes tendant a assurer la permanence du contrat. Tout au long de cet examen, les elements de la distinction entre les contrats divisibles et les contrats indivisibles sont peu a peu degages. La seconde partie est consacree aux frontieres de la distinction. Dans un premier temps sont exposees les imperfections des criteres de la classification actuelle. Dans un second temps, est presentee la nouvelle distinction entre les contrats divisibles et les contrats indivisibles. Celle-ci repose sur deux concepts. Tout d'abord un critere technique, la succession d'equilibres partiels et autonomes, et enfin un fondement theorique : la cause. Ces instruments sont alors appliques permettant de dresser le tableau de la nouvelle distinction.

The subject of this work is to demonstrate that the usual, which sets the successive execution agreements against the instantaneous execution agreements, can be efficiently replaced by the distinction between the divisible agreements and the indivisible agreements. The first part is relative to the relevances of the traditionnal distinction. It emerges from this study that this opposition is unfitted to explain, in a satisfactory way, the differences of the juridical basis noticed and announced, which it is about the mecanisms which ensure the contractual permanency, or which it is about those which lead to the disappearance of the agreement. All along this examination, the components of the distinction between the divisible agreements and the indivisible agreements are brought out. The second part is devoted to the borders of the distinctionl in a first time are stated the imperfections of the criterions of the actual classification. Then, in a second time is presented the new distinction between the divisible agreements and the indivisible agreements. This last is based on two concepts. First of all, a criterion, the succession of partial and autonomous balances, and then, a theoritical foundation : the cause. These implements are then applied, entitting to draw the picture of a new distinction.