Research On Validity Of Fluidity Contract

Fluidity contract is forbidden inmost countries of the world. China is no exception. Along with the rapid development of social economy in recent years, civil activities pay more attention to efficiency. In the area of security interests, the prohibition of fluidity contract has a serious impact on the demand for efficiency of civil subject. The way of financing to individual is limited also. So, countries(regions) begin to rethink the advantages and disadvantages of banning fluidity contract. Some of them have admitted its legal validity. Fluidity contract is forbidden in current laws. But, it is undesirable when the background was completely changed. The law never catches up with the social life. So, the legal opinions and traditional rules should improve themselves to adapt the development of society. We should regard the fluidity contract as average terms of the contract. There is no need to judge its validity in advance. We can judge the validity of fluidity contract by placing itself under freedom of contract. In another word, fluidity contract is valid in principle, it is only ineffective in special cricumstances. Only in this way, can we ensure the freedom of contract and promote the transaction efficiency. At the same time, admitting the legal validity of fluidity contract will safeguard and balance the interests of parties. If the legal validity of fluidity contract is admitted by current laws,the idea of law will make corporate development with the socioeconomic. The article consists of five parts: The first part is summary. This part is mainly introducing the concept and the constitution of fluidity contract to make us have a better understanding of it.Then introduction about the background and the reason of banning fluidity contract, to clarify the source of banning fluidity contract.The second part is expounding the option value and necessity of lifting banning fluidity contract. It’s mainly analyzing the reason of lifting banning fluidity contract on option value. And then, this article will demonstrate the necessity of banning fluidity contract on the legal system itself. The third part compares the current system of banning fluidity contract with admitting the legal validity of fluidity contract, to demonstrate the superiority of admitting the legal validity of fluidity contract. This part confirms the prospective of admitting the legal validity of fluidity contract by construction cost and the risking sharing. The forth part is in the premise of admitting the legal validity of fluidity contract, to give advice on such matters. Such as legislative proposals, publicity system offluidity contract. The last part is conclusion.