顯名主義

Abstract

Contract concluded between agent and the other party binds the principal so long as the agent disclosed the fact that he was acting for the principal and the agent acted within the scope of his authority. This principal is labelled as doctrine of principal disclosure. The notable points are following two. The writer makes it clear that the ground of attributing effect of agent's disclosing act to the principal bases on the agent's intention of such attribution, and emphasizes the pose of Civil Act §115 that effect of agent's undisclosing act is principally attributed to the agent self and exceptionally to the principal on condition of the other party's knowledge or knowledgeability does not differ from the pose of Civil Act §107 providing the effect of manifestation of untrue intention. The writer's such interpretation can also be applies to disclosing problem of passive agency, though majority assert non-application. The second is whether the principal must be specified or specifiable at the time of concluding the contract. The writer asserts as following. : If the other party does not agree to conclude the contract without specifying the principal, the contract should be treated to conclude for agent self. The ground is the principal must exist at the time of agency and representing the principal is legally impossible without his authorization. But the agent can conclude the contract if the other party agrees to conclude it in unspecified or unidentifiable state, as the other party is free to conclude it. This sort of contract belongs to juristic act with condition subsequent, and the agent assumes the obligation to specify principal in a short period of time as a guarantee. This article contains several other disputable points such as agency without representing agent status, commercial agency.