Regole di validità e regole di responsabilità nel diritto privato
type: CreativeWork
description: The Ph.D. dissertation focuses on the relationship between validity rules (rules of validity) and liability rules under private law, reconsidering it at a dogmatic level, with reference to the concepts of «valid contract» and «fair contract». The first part of the research highlights the structural and functional characteristics of the two categories of rules mentioned above, whose difference evokes a principle of non-interference between them by virtue of a now-rooted legal tradition. Following this principle, the invalidity of the contract is not due to the violation of a behavioural rule (rule of conduct), whether it occurs in the form of the nullity or the possibility of annulment. In the second part, what acts as a motor to the present examination is the reflection, in evolutionary terms, of the role of good faith within the contractual matters, especially during the formation of the contract. The question arises as to whether a bad faith conduct during the negotiations can invalidate the contract or can integrate a single responsibility for damages (and so a compensation). The third part concentrates on the remedial profile, retracing the various positions taken in the legal literature and in case-law, also highlighting the cases that most often occur before the interpreter's evaluation. The breaches of the disclosure requirements are a clear examples of that. In conclusion, the analysis shows how the solutions considered are critical but on the other hand sharable; hence the difficulty of adopting a single solution to balance conflictual interests: legal certainty and substantial justice.
abstract: The Ph.D. dissertation focuses on the relationship between validity rules (rules of validity) and liability rules under private law, reconsidering it at a dogmatic level, with reference to the concepts of «valid contract» and «fair contract». The first part of the research highlights the structural and functional characteristics of the two categories of rules mentioned above, whose difference evokes a principle of non-interference between them by virtue of a now-rooted legal tradition. Following this principle, the invalidity of the contract is not due to the violation of a behavioural rule (rule of conduct), whether it occurs in the form of the nullity or the possibility of annulment. In the second part, what acts as a motor to the present examination is the reflection, in evolutionary terms, of the role of good faith within the contractual matters, especially during the formation of the contract. The question arises as to whether a bad faith conduct during the negotiations can invalidate the contract or can integrate a single responsibility for damages (and so a compensation). The third part concentrates on the remedial profile, retracing the various positions taken in the legal literature and in case-law, also highlighting the cases that most often occur before the interpreter's evaluation. The breaches of the disclosure requirements are a clear examples of that. In conclusion, the analysis shows how the solutions considered are critical but on the other hand sharable; hence the difficulty of adopting a single solution to balance conflictual interests: legal certainty and substantial justice.
author: RINALDO, MARIANNA
language: ita
keywords: liability rules, rules of validity, regole di comportamento, regole di validità, Settore IUS/01 - Diritto Privato
date published: 2016-03-18
date modified: 2026-07-24T01:30:12Z
provider: Università di Cagliari
publisher: Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations
type: WebPage
source organization: Università degli Studi di Cagliari

PropertyValue
property ID: Handle
value: http://hdl.handle.net/11584/266661