law-contract
Compare original and translation side by side
🇺🇸
Original
English🇨🇳
Translation
ChineseContract Analysis
合同分析
Overview
概述
Contract law governs enforceable agreements. This skill covers formation requirements, essential clauses, and common risk areas for business contracts. It is educational guidance, not legal advice — always consult a qualified attorney for specific situations.
合同法管辖具有约束力的协议。本技能涵盖商业合同的成立要件、核心条款以及常见风险领域。本内容为教育指导，而非法律建议——针对具体情况请务必咨询合格律师。
Framework
框架
IRON LAW: A Contract Requires Offer + Acceptance + Consideration + Legality
All four elements must be present for a valid contract. Missing any one
means no enforceable contract exists — regardless of how formal the document
looks. A signed document without consideration (exchange of value) is
not a contract.IRON LAW: A Contract Requires Offer + Acceptance + Consideration + Legality
All four elements must be present for a valid contract. Missing any one
means no enforceable contract exists — regardless of how formal the document
looks. A signed document without consideration (exchange of value) is
not a contract.Contract Formation
合同成立要件
| Element | Definition | Test |
|---|---|---|
| Offer | Clear, definite proposal with intent to be bound | Would a reasonable person understand this as a binding proposal? |
| Acceptance | Unqualified agreement to the offer's terms | Mirror image rule: acceptance must match the offer exactly |
| Consideration | Something of value exchanged by both parties | Each side gives up something (money, services, rights, promises) |
| Legality | Subject matter must be legal and parties must have capacity | No illegal purpose; parties must be competent adults or authorized entities |
| 要素 | 定义 | 验证标准 |
|---|---|---|
| Offer | 明确、确定的提议，具有受约束的意图 | 理性人是否会将其理解为具有约束力的提议？ |
| Acceptance | 对要约条款的无条件同意 | 镜像规则：承诺必须与要约完全一致 |
| Consideration | 双方交换的有价值之物 | 双方均需放弃某些事物（金钱、服务、权利、承诺） |
| Legality | 标的必须合法，且当事人具备行为能力 | 无非法目的；当事人必须是有行为能力的成年人或经授权的实体 |
Essential Contract Clauses
核心合同条款
| Clause | Purpose | Red Flags |
|---|---|---|
| Parties | Who is bound | Incorrect entity name, no authority to sign |
| Scope/Subject | What is being exchanged | Vague deliverables, undefined terms |
| Payment terms | When and how payment occurs | No payment schedule, no late payment consequences |
| Term & Termination | Duration and exit conditions | Auto-renewal without notice, no termination for cause |
| Liability & Indemnity | Who bears risk | Unlimited liability, one-sided indemnification |
| Confidentiality (NDA) | Information protection | Overly broad definition, no time limit |
| IP ownership | Who owns created work | Ambiguous ownership of work product |
| Non-compete | Restrictions after termination | Overly broad scope/geography/duration |
| Dispute resolution | How conflicts are resolved | Foreign jurisdiction, mandatory arbitration without consent |
| Force majeure | Excused performance for unforeseeable events | Too narrow or too broad definition |
| 条款 | 目的 | 警示信号 |
|---|---|---|
| Parties | 明确受约束的主体 | 实体名称错误、签署人无授权 |
| Scope/Subject | 明确交换的内容 | 交付内容模糊、术语定义不明 |
| Payment terms | 明确付款时间与方式 | 无付款时间表、未约定逾期付款后果 |
| Term & Termination | 明确合同期限与终止条件 | 未通知自动续约、无因终止条款缺失 |
| Liability & Indemnity | 明确风险承担方 | 无限责任、单方 indemnification（赔偿）条款 |
| Confidentiality (NDA) | 保护涉密信息 | 定义过于宽泛、无时间限制 |
| IP ownership | 明确成果所有权 | 工作成果所有权约定模糊 |
| Non-compete | 明确终止后的限制 | 范围/地域/期限过于宽泛 |
| Dispute resolution | 明确争议解决方式 | 境外管辖、未经同意的强制仲裁 |
| Force majeure | 明确不可预见事件下的免责情形 | 定义过窄或过宽 |
Contract Review Steps
合同审查步骤
- Identify the parties: Who is agreeing? Are entity names correct?
- Understand the deal: What is each side giving and receiving?
- Check formation elements: Offer, acceptance, consideration, legality — all present?
- Review essential clauses: Use the table above as a checklist
- Flag risk areas: Unlimited liability, one-sided terms, vague scope, auto-renewal
- Check governing law: Which jurisdiction's law applies? Is the dispute resolution mechanism acceptable?
- 确认当事人：协议双方是谁？实体名称是否正确？
- 理解交易内容：双方各自付出与获得的是什么？
- 检查成立要件：Offer、Acceptance、Consideration、Legality是否全部具备？
- 审查核心条款：以上表为清单逐一核查
- 标记风险领域：无限责任、单方条款、模糊范围、自动续约
- 核查管辖法律：适用哪个司法管辖区的法律？争议解决机制是否可接受？
Output Format
输出格式
markdown
undefinedmarkdown
undefinedContract Review: {Agreement Type}
Contract Review: {Agreement Type}
Parties
Parties
- Party A: {name, role}
- Party B: {name, role}
- Party A: {name, role}
- Party B: {name, role}
Deal Summary
Deal Summary
{What is being exchanged — in plain language}
{What is being exchanged — in plain language}
Clause Review
Clause Review
| Clause | Present? | Assessment | Risk Level |
|---|---|---|---|
| Scope | Y/N | {notes} | 🟢/🟡/🔴 |
| Payment | Y/N | ... | ... |
| Termination | Y/N | ... | ... |
| Liability | Y/N | ... | ... |
| IP | Y/N | ... | ... |
| Non-compete | Y/N | ... | ... |
| Clause | Present? | Assessment | Risk Level |
|---|---|---|---|
| Scope | Y/N | {notes} | 🟢/🟡/🔴 |
| Payment | Y/N | ... | ... |
| Termination | Y/N | ... | ... |
| Liability | Y/N | ... | ... |
| IP | Y/N | ... | ... |
| Non-compete | Y/N | ... | ... |
Red Flags
Red Flags
- {specific concern with clause reference}
- {specific concern with clause reference}
Recommendations
Recommendations
- {suggested modification}
undefined- {suggested modification}
undefinedExamples
示例
Correct Application
正确应用示例
Scenario: SaaS service agreement review
- Red flag: "Vendor may modify pricing with 30 days' notice" → One-sided price change clause. Should be: pricing locked for contract term, changes only at renewal.
- Red flag: "Client indemnifies Vendor against all claims" → One-sided indemnification. Should be mutual.
- Missing: No SLA (service level agreement) defined → No recourse if service goes down. Recommend adding uptime commitment with credits ✓
场景：SaaS服务协议审查
- 警示点：“供应商可提前30天通知修改定价” → 单方价格变更条款。建议修改为：合同期限内定价锁定，仅在续约时可调整。
- 警示点：“客户需赔偿供应商的所有索赔” → 单方赔偿条款。建议修改为双方互负赔偿责任。
- 缺失条款：未定义SLA（服务水平协议）→ 服务中断时无救济途径。建议添加 uptime（可用率）承诺及对应补偿 ✓
Incorrect Application
错误应用示例
- "This contract looks fine because both parties signed it" → Signature doesn't make every clause fair or enforceable. Must review individual clause terms. A signed contract with an unconscionable clause may still be challenged.
- “这份合同双方都签了字，看起来没问题” → 签字不代表所有条款都公平或可执行。必须审查单个条款内容。存在显失公平条款的已签署合同仍可能被质疑。
Gotchas
注意事项
- "Standard contract" doesn't mean fair: Vendor-drafted "standard" contracts are drafted in the vendor's favor. Everything is negotiable.
- Taiwan-specific: Taiwan's Civil Code governs contracts. Key differences from common law: no consideration requirement (promise for promise is sufficient), mandatory provisions in certain contract types (labor, consumer).
- Auto-renewal traps: Many contracts auto-renew unless notice is given 30-90 days before expiry. Calendar the notice deadline.
- This skill is NOT legal advice: It provides educational analysis of contract concepts. Always consult a licensed attorney for binding legal decisions.
- “标准合同”不代表公平：供应商起草的“标准”合同通常偏向自身利益。所有条款均可协商。
- 台湾地区特殊规定：台湾地区的Civil Code管辖合同事务。与普通法的主要差异：无需Consideration（对价）（承诺即有效），特定合同类型（劳动、消费者合同）存在强制性条款。
- 自动续约陷阱：许多合同会自动续约，除非在到期前30-90天发出通知。请标记通知截止日期。
- 本技能并非法律建议：仅提供合同概念的教育性分析。对于具有约束力的法律决策，请务必咨询持牌律师。
References
参考资料
- For Taiwan-specific contract law (Civil Code), see
references/taiwan-contract-law.md - For common contract templates, see
references/contract-templates.md
- 台湾地区合同相关法律（Civil Code），详见
references/taiwan-contract-law.md - 通用合同模板，详见
references/contract-templates.md