合規(guī)解讀 - 用法定代表人的私章簽訂的合同有效嗎？
【案情概述 Case Brief】
2018年6月上海某精密機(jī)械公司（下稱A公司）與江蘇某數(shù)控車床公司（下稱B公司）簽署了《設(shè)備定做開發(fā)合同》，但B公司在合同上加蓋的是其公司法定代表人的私章，未加蓋公章。
A Shanghai Company (hereinafter the“Company A”) and a Jiangsu Company (hereinafter the “Company B”) have entered into a Contract for Work for some equipment products in the People’s Republic of China (hereinafter the “Contract”) in June, 2018.(Note: A contract for work is a contract whereby the contractor shall, in light of the requirements of the ordering party, complete certain work and deliver the results therefrom, and the ordering party pays the remuneration therefor. Work includes processing, ordering,) The Contract was sealed with the personal signing bar of the Company B’s Legal Representative instead of the duly signing bar of the Company B.
A公司開始組織人力進(jìn)行設(shè)計(jì)和開發(fā)。因B公司訂單不足，該設(shè)備B公司不想繼續(xù)履行合同。雙方在隨后的溝通過程中產(chǎn)生合同糾紛，訴至法院。其中爭(zhēng)議焦點(diǎn)之一便是：用私章簽《設(shè)備定做開發(fā)合同》是否成立.
Company A began to design and produce. Due to the shortage of orders, Company B expressed explicitly by its conduct that it would fail to perform the obligations under the Contract. Later, Company A filed an appeal to the people’s court on contractual dispute against Company B. One of dispute focal points was whether the Contract came to effect only with the personal signing bar of the Company B’s Legal Representative.
【辦案分享 Experience】
接到案件委托后，徐寶同律師團(tuán)隊(duì)做了大量的分析和判例研究，從文字表述看，合同是B公司與A公司簽署的，但從蓋章落款上看，卻又不直接體現(xiàn)B公司的意思表示。
After entrusted by Company A, Lawyer Xu’s legal team analyzed the evidences.It was written that the Contract would be valid only after chopped by the both parties. In fact，the Contract was lack of the duly signing bar of the Company B.
本案合同糾紛的核心問題是，用私章簽訂的《設(shè)備定做開發(fā)合同》是否成立，該合同對(duì)B公司是否具有法律拘束力。
The core issues are whether the Contract was valid and whether the Contract was binding on the Company B.
徐寶同律師認(rèn)為，依法成立的合同，對(duì)當(dāng)事人具有法律約束力，并受法律保護(hù)。當(dāng)事人達(dá)成合意是合同的成立的必備要件。
The Contract established according to law is protected by law and shall be legally binding on the parties thereto. It is necessary for the establishment of the contract to agree with each other.
《民法典》第四百九十條 當(dāng)事人采用合同書形式訂立合同的，自當(dāng)事人均簽名、蓋章或者按指印時(shí)合同成立。在簽名、蓋章或者按指印之前，當(dāng)事人一方已經(jīng)履行主要義務(wù)，對(duì)方接受時(shí)，該合同成立。該條明確了當(dāng)事人在合同書上簽字或蓋章的時(shí)間為合同成立的時(shí)間，不僅確認(rèn)了當(dāng)事人達(dá)成合意的外在表現(xiàn)形式為簽字或者蓋章，而且賦予了蓋章與簽字在合同成立上同等的法律效力。
The Civil Code Article 32 If the parties conclude a contract in the form of a written contract, the contract is established when both parties signed or sealed the contract. This article specifies that the time when the parties sign or seal the contract is the same time as the contract is established. This article not only confirms that the external manifestation of the both parties is signature or seal, but also recognizes the seal and signature is the same as the legal effect on the establishment of the contract.
因此，經(jīng)當(dāng)事人簽字或者蓋章的合同應(yīng)該是當(dāng)事人達(dá)成合意的體現(xiàn)，對(duì)雙方當(dāng)事人具有法律拘束力。依法成立的法人或其他組織均有登記備案的公章，經(jīng)登記備案的公章對(duì)外具有公示效力，所以，通常情況下，法人或者其他組織在對(duì)外簽訂合同時(shí)，采用蓋章的形式。而自然人的私章沒有登記備案的要求，對(duì)外不具有公示效力，在私章所代表的一方否認(rèn)該私章為其所有，蓋章行為是其所為時(shí)，該方當(dāng)事人實(shí)質(zhì)是否認(rèn)與對(duì)方當(dāng)事人達(dá)成合意成立了合同關(guān)系，此時(shí)就涉及合同關(guān)系是否成立的舉證責(zé)任的分配問題。
The Contract became effective with the duly sign and seal and was binding on the both parties. Each Legal entity has duly signing bar that was filed at the Police Station. Usually, legal entities sign contracts with the duly signing bar. Because the personal signing bar of the Legal Representative is not compulsory to be filed at the Police Station，whether the seal was on behalf of the Company B involves the burden to provide evidence for its claims.
根據(jù)《最高人民法院關(guān)于民事訴訟證據(jù)的若干規(guī)定》（2008年調(diào)整）第五條的規(guī)定，在合同糾紛案件中，主張合同關(guān)系成立的一方當(dāng)事人對(duì)合同訂立的事實(shí)承擔(dān)舉證責(zé)任。
即在雙方當(dāng)事人就合同關(guān)系是否成立存在爭(zhēng)議的情況下，應(yīng)由主張合同關(guān)系立的一方當(dāng)事人承擔(dān)舉證責(zé)任。因此，在私章所代表的一方公司B否認(rèn)該私章為其所有，蓋章行為是其所為，即否認(rèn)與對(duì)方成立合同關(guān)系時(shí)，公司A應(yīng)由主張證明該枚私章為對(duì)方所有以及蓋章的行為為對(duì)方所為或?qū)Ψ轿兴怂鶠椤?/span>
Some Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Evidence in Civil Procedures (2008 Amendment) Article 5 In a contractual dispute, the party that claims the establishment of contractual relationship and the contract has taken effect shall be responsible for providing evidences to prove that the contract has been concluded and it has taken effect.
According to the above-mentioned article, when one party denied the establishment of the contract，the other party should be responsible for providing the evidences to prove that the personal signing bar was belong to the Company B and it was chopped by this company.
就本案來說，B公司否認(rèn)合同書上的私章為其所有，也否認(rèn)在合同書上蓋過私章，實(shí)質(zhì)是否認(rèn)與A公司訂立過涉案設(shè)備定做開發(fā)合同。在此情況下，A公司應(yīng)該舉證證明其與B公司之間成立了合同關(guān)系，即私章為B公司所有且蓋章行為也為B公司所為。
In the circumstance of this case, Company B denied the establishment of the contract, and Company A shall be responsible for providing the evidences to prove that the Contract became effective.
綜上，在雙方當(dāng)事人就合同關(guān)系是否成立存在爭(zhēng)議的情況下，應(yīng)由主張合同關(guān)系成立的一方當(dāng)事人承擔(dān)舉證責(zé)任。
In conclusion, in a contractual dispute, the party that claims the establishment of contractual relationship and the contract has taken effect shall be responsible for providing evidences to prove that the contract has been concluded and it has taken effect.
以上是徐寶同律師團(tuán)隊(duì)今天為大家分享的合同名字與蓋章不一致的情況下如何處理合同糾紛的經(jīng)驗(yàn)，如果您想獲取更多關(guān)于合同糾紛處理的建議，可以聯(lián)系徐寶同律師。
Lawyer Xu’s legal team sums up the experience that how shall the legal entities to handle the contractual dispute about that the written contract is inconsistent with the duly seal. If you have any further question, please do not hesitate to contact Lawyer XuBaotong.
特別聲明Notes：
以上文章僅代表作者本人觀點(diǎn)，不代表上海錦坤律師事務(wù)所或其律師出具的任何形式之法律意見或建議。如需轉(zhuǎn)載或引用該等文章的任何內(nèi)容，請(qǐng)私信溝通授權(quán)事宜。如您有意就相關(guān)話題進(jìn)一步交流或探討，歡迎與本所或律師本人聯(lián)系。
This article only represents the author's own views, and does not represent any form of legal opinions or suggestions issued by Shanghai Jinkun Law Firm .If you need to reprint or quote any content of these articles, please contact us. If you are interested in further exchange or discussion on related topics, please contact the lawyer or us.
作者:徐寶同 Author：XuBaotong
日照仲裁委員會(huì) 仲裁員
Arbitrator of RIZHAO Arbitration
上海錦坤律師事務(wù)所 合伙人
Partner of Shanghai JinKun Law firm
業(yè)務(wù)方向: 民商事類、訴訟仲裁爭(zhēng)議解決
Commercial Arbitration and Litigation
聯(lián)系方式Phone:+86-139 1721 9966
