HAL will be down for maintenance from Friday, June 10 at 4pm through Monday, June 13 at 9am. More information
Skip to Main content Skip to Navigation

Théorie des risques et transfert de propriété. Comparaison des droits français, de l'OHADA et du commerce international

Abstract : The risk theory is inspired by Roman legal maxims which purpose is to determine the legal consequences of non-compliance with the contractual obligation in case of force majeure. Pursuant to the res perit debitori, res perit creditori et res perit domino maxims consequences of the non-compliance of the contractual obligations are born either by the debtor of the obligation, by the creditor or by the good owner. A comparative overview of French law, the OHADA Convention and the Vienna Convention of 11 April 1980 on contracts for the international sales of goods demonstrates the superiority of the res perit domino principle in the conceptions for the resolution of the risk matter. According to this approach, existing law is based on two sets of solutions for the determination of the party who has to bear the risk: the application of a principle releasing the parties from their mutual obligations by virtue of the accidental non-compliance with the contractual obligations; the application of rules where only one party is released from his/her obligations. The examination of both sets of solutions shows inconsistencies which are particularly visible in the OHADA and Vienna Convention systems. Rules a priori considered as being derogatory are in fact a mere a contrario application of the principle. This inconsistency is the result of the way the risk matter is being addressed by the three legal system subject to the study. According to a widespread belief, the solutions differ. However, the difference is only apparent. A close look indicates indeed that their similarities are not unexpected. All the solutions stem from the same system of reasoning and, therefore, are subject to the same criticisms. Among the three Latin maxims, the res perit domino definitely prevails. Risks are borne by the owner of the good at the time of its loss. The rule associating the risks with the transfer of property is applicable in the three systems. This approach of the burden of risk is the cause of ill-adapted rules. It emerged in French law on the basis of the interpretation of 1804 Civil code provisions. This interpretation will be discussed by the thesis. After a general presentation of the solutions implemented by the three systems, the objective of this doctoral thesis is to explore the misunderstandings on the ratio legis of French civil code. The thesis restores the original view of the French codifiers, who were promoting solutions fitted to the risk theory. The thesis underlines the connection between the burden of risk and the obligation to deliver as provided by the French Civil code of 1804. The thesis demonstrates the ultimate goal of the property transfer mechanism solo consensus which is not to have the risk borne by the buyer. The res perit domino rule is in fact not to be found in the French civil code of 1804. It only refers to the res perit debitori in order to characterize the case where the accidental loss of the good releases the parties from their mutual obligations. The res perit creditori lays on different foundations. Therefore, it is necessary to promote a renewed understanding of the unknown original solutions of 1804. The French civil code system ignores the res perit domino rule. It became applicable only through Ordinance 2016-131 of 10 February 2016 reforms contract law and rules on proof.
Document type :
Complete list of metadata

Cited literature [1123 references]  Display  Hide  Download

Contributor : Abes Star :  Contact
Submitted on : Thursday, February 21, 2019 - 3:32:07 PM
Last modification on : Tuesday, December 21, 2021 - 2:02:02 PM
Long-term archiving on: : Wednesday, May 22, 2019 - 7:00:44 PM


Version validated by the jury (STAR)


  • HAL Id : tel-02044574, version 1



Allatan Ndordji. Théorie des risques et transfert de propriété. Comparaison des droits français, de l'OHADA et du commerce international. Droit. Université de Poitiers; Université du Tchad, 2018. Français. ⟨NNT : 2018POIT3004⟩. ⟨tel-02044574⟩



Record views


Files downloads