| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立臺灣大學 === 事業經營法務碩士在職學位學程 === 106 === The legal relationship of borrowing other’s name for registration exists extensively in our country’s social and economic activities. Even though judges affirm that borrowing other’s name does not violate an imperative or prohibitive provision of the act, as well as is not against public policy or morals during the judicial practices, it happens among private individuals. More commonly, that act of borrowing other’s name is performed by companies as a business strategy. Therefore, the various types of business problems derived from this type of judicial act in the business field are worth exploring.
A borrowing name contract is an innominate contract, which is not revealed in the Civil Code. Current practices resolve the judicial issues by the analogous application of the provisions regarding the mandate. However, in today’s ever-changes corporate activities, the analogy is still insufficient to ensure the security of transactions. Regulations should be implemented to regulate the parties who borrow names, the parties who lend names, and the third parties. A system should be developed based on the principals of freedom of contract and appropriate laws and regulations.
The article defines the nature and legal effectiveness of the borrowing name contract through discussing the practical and academic opinions. Furthermore, legal issues associated with the civil, criminal and public laws happen during the acts of borrowing names in the business will be examined. The common acts performed include registering real estate owned by existing companies under other’s name, borrowing the business name of the taxi or freight business, borrowing other’s license to sign contracts of construction, opening franchise business and etc will be examined. Reference to judicial practices and academic opinions, a solution to the legal problems derived from the company’s borrowing names activity will be proposed.
|
|---|
