旅館經營及管理 ─ 契約架構設計與法律風險

Abstract

締約當事人間在契約自由原則之下，除非違反法律強行規定或公序良俗，否則得以締結各種非典型契約。值得注意的是，隨著社會與經濟之改變，商業交易愈趨複雜，商事契約尤應考量各產業之特性，縱使契約被冠上法律上有名契約之名稱，如核其內容不符合法律所預設該種類契約之內容架構，而仍堅持套用法條或過去之司法解釋來補充契約漏洞或解釋契約，恐怕會造成法律與現實商業模式的嚴重脫節。 而在旅館產業的非典型契約中，旅館經營契約中各方當事人之經營模式為何？委託經營模式如反映到契約條款，則契約條款之內容為何？其契約架構背後，有何商業模式及原因？又旅館產業運作之背景，是如何影響契約架構之形成？當發生訴訟案件時，法院是如何判斷當事人間之權利義務關係，而在旅館產業特性的脈絡下，法院又應作何種解釋？ 本文期望能介紹國內較少相關資訊之旅館經營契約，並藉由研究美國旅館產業之管理模式，乃至於深具獨特性之旅館經營契約約款及美國法院判決，期能使我國法院對旅館實務上之案例進行判斷時，能與當事人之商業模式與交易行為相結合，進而得到最符合交易實質之解釋結果。

Non-standard contracts can be formed under the principle of free will between parties and without violation to imposed laws or public morality. What is worth noting is that along with social and economic changes, business transactions become increasingly complicated. Commercial contracts must emphasize considerations to the characteristics of each industry and while contracts may receive legal standing, if the contents do not adhere to legal assumptions of the contract’s content structure and insists on appropriating laws or judicial precedence to explain or supplement contracts, this may cause a severe rift in laws and practical business models. In non-standard contracts of the hotel industry, what is the operation model of the hotel’s contractual party? How are entrusted operation models reflected in contractual terms, and how are the terms of a contract established? What are the business models and reasoning behind contractual structure? How does the background of operations in the hotel industry affect the formation of the contract’s structure? When a legal dispute occurs, how do judicial courts determine the rights and obligations of the party and how should the courts explain their reasoning under the characteristic pulse of the hotel industry? This paper aims to introduce hotel operations contracts, an area that is lacking in information within the nation. Through study of hotel industry management models in the U.S. and in-depth analysis of unique hotel management contracts and U.S. judicial verdicts, the paper will aim to provide explanation for this nation’s judicial verdicts in cases. The plaintiff’s business model and transaction behavior will be combined to form an explanation most appropriate for actual transactions.