Internal and External Restrictions of the Freedom of Contract

本研究厘清了对契约自由的内部和外部限制。当代福利资本主义国家为了实现社会经济目的，干预市场经济体制。其背景原因、干预方式和干预程度因国家不同而不同，但大多数研究者认为，基于社会服务去商品化和分层的不同，社会服务存在三种不同的类型。在法学研究领域，关于通过立法和法院判决进行干预，有形式主义和现实主义两种不同的类型。在现实主义干预中，可以看到市场个人主义和消费者福利主义。根据最近的研究结果，直到18世纪末，契约自由一直受到传统的公平和公平理想的限制。合同正义、合同的真实性质和合同的基本义务等概念被用于法国民法。在德国民法中，采用了良好的道德和公共政策原则，并在《德国民法典》中纳入了对合同的内部限制。在当代福利社会中，基于保护社会和经济弱者的想法而对合同自由进行外部限制的例子很多。在法国和德国的法律研究中，这些外部限制是由专门的立法规定的。契约自由内部限制与外部限制的分离在日本法学研究中尚不为人所知，本研究阐明了这种分离或分类的重要性。

This research clarifies internal and external restrictions over the freedom of contract. The contemporary welfare capitalist countries intervene into a market economy system in order to achieve socio-economic purposes. The background reasons, the methods to intervene, and the degree of intervention differ from country to country, however, most researchers agree that there are three different types, based on the differences of de-commodification and stratification of social services. In the field of legal studies, with regard to intervention through legislation and court decisions, there are two different types, formalism and realism. Within the realism intervention, market-individualism and consumer-welfarerism can be recognized.According to the results of recent research, the freedom of contract has been restricted by traditional ideals of equity and fairness until the end of 18th century. The concepts of a contractual justice, a true nature of contract, and an essential obligation of contract were used in French civil law. In German civil law, principles of the good morals and public policy were used and internal restrictions of contract are included in German Civil Code. In a contemporary welfare society, there are many examples of external restrictions over the freedom of contract based on the idea of the protection of socially and economically weaker parties. In French and German legal studies, these external restrictions are provided by special legislations. The separation of internal and external restrictions of the freedom of contract was not known in Japanese legal research, this research clarified the importance of this separation or classification.