304 the enforceabilit y of promises

reasons’ (art. 6:220 of the Civil Code10). Whether Simone’s reasons here can be said to be serious is doubtful. If, indeed, such an offer could not have been revoked, a member of the public could have accepted it and so made it binding. For some time it was thought that an offer of reward is accepted by performing the required act such as finding the object.11 Today, however, it is thought that in addition to performance, one must declare one’s will (wilsverklaring) to accept.12

spain

The promise in Case 14(a) is binding. When Simone makes her promise to Raymond, there is a causa credendi (see Case 10). Therefore, the promise is enforceable provided that it is accepted. If Raymond finds the necklace, Simone has to pay (art. 1107 of the Civil Code).13

In Case 14(b), Simone makes her offer to the public rather than to a particular person. Spanish law has followed § 657 of the German Civil Code. If someone offers a reward to the general public for either doing an act or getting a result, he or she is obligated without the need for an acceptance.14 Moreover, in contrast to English common law, the promisor is obligated even if the one who returned the necklace was unaware of the promise. The promise may be revoked if the revocation is made public to the same extent as the promise was.

portugal

Simone can withdraw the promise in both cases but in Case 14(a) she can be forced to compensate Raymond for the expenses he has incurred.

The promise made to the private detective in Case 14(a) is binding provided that it was accepted. After acceptance, a contract for services has been formed (art. 1154) to which the Portuguese Civil Code applies the rules that govern an agency contract (contrato de mandato) pursuant to art. 1156. According to these rules, the contract can be unilaterally revoked by either of the parties at will (art. 1170). Therefore Simone can withdraw the promise, but in this case she would have to compensate Raymond for any

10Article 6:220(1) of the Civil Code: ‘An offer of reward made for a specific period can be revoked or modified for serious reasons.’

11See Bei Weissmann, Verbintennissenrecht, art. 220, no. 23.

12Asser-Hartkamp vol. II, no. 142.

13L. Díez Picazo, ‘Las declaraciones unilaterales de voluntad como fuentes de obligaciones y la jurisprudencia del tribunal supremo’, Anuario de derecho civil 27 (1974), 456 at 465.

14Díez Picazo and Gullón, Sistema de derecho civil, vol. II, 145.

loss he incurred. In an agency contract, any necessary expenses the agent incurs must always be reimbursed by the principal (art. 1167).

Case 14(b) concerns a promise made to the public which in Portuguese law is one of the exceptional cases in which a unilateral promise will constitute an obligation. According to art. 459 of the Civil Code, if someone, by a public announcement, offers a reward to any member of the public either for being in a certain situation or for taking some action or omission, the promise is immediately binding without the need for an acceptance. The promisor is even obligated to those who are in the situation or perform the act without attempting to earn the reward or even in ignorance of it.

However, if no term was fixed for the duration of the promise, it can be revoked up until the time that the action is performed if the revocation is made in the same way as the promise (art. 461). Therefore, if the necklace has not yet been found, Simone can revoke her promise by another announcement made public to the same extent. In this case, the expenses incurred by people who tried to find the necklace need not be reimbursed.

italy

In both Cases 14(a) and 14(b), Simone cannot withdraw her promise because she has changed her mind. In Case 14(b), she can revoke her promise only for just cause.

Case 14(b) is a promise to the public which is governed by arts. 1989 ff. of the Civil Code.15 The promise is binding as soon as it is made public (art. 1989(1)). If no time limit is set for the performance, and one cannot be inferred from the nature or the purpose of the promise, the limit will be deemed to be one year (art. 1989(2)). The promise may be revoked before the end of this period only if the revocation is made public in the same way as the promise or in an equivalent way. But it can only be revoked for a just cause (art. 1990).

15Article 1989 of the Civil Code: ‘Promise to the public: A person who, addressing himself to the public, promises a given performance in favour of a person who is found in a specific situation or who performs a specific action, is bound by such promise as soon as it is made public. If no time limit is set in the promise or is implicit in its nature or purpose, the promisor is freed from his obligation if he is not notified within one year from the time of the promise that the specified situation or performance called for in the promise has occurred.’ Article 1990 of the Civil Code: ‘Revocation of promise: Before the end of the period indicated in the preceding article, a promise can be revoked only for just cause, provided that the revocation be made public in the same manner as the promise or in an equivalent form. In no case shall the revocation be effective if the situation called for in the promise has already materialized or if the act called for has already been performed.’

306 the enforceabilit y of promises

There is a just cause for revocation when, due to supervening events that are not due to the negligence of the promisor, the goal he is pursuing becomes impossible, or the act in return for which he has made the promise becomes completely useless even if it is still possible.16 ‘Just cause’ means that the promisor’s interest in revoking is allowed to prevail over the other party’s interest in holding him to his promise.17 A mere change of mind, of course, is not considered by case law a just cause for revocation.18

In Case 14(a), Simone has promised Raymond money if he finds her necklace. Raymond undertook no obligation to do so explicitly or implicitly but if he finds the necklace he is to receive the money. Scholars differ as to how conditional promises of this sort should be analysed.19 Some20 claim that they are governed by art. 1333 of the Civil Code.21 It provides that an offer that creates obligations only for the offeror is irrevocable as soon as it comes to the notice of the person to whom it is directed. According to others,22 such a promise is governed by art. 1327.23 It provides that when a performance is to take place without a prior acceptance of an offer, the offer is binding when the performance begins. By the one opinion, then, such a promise is irrevocable as soon as it comes to the promisee’s notice. Scholars who take this approach say that nevertheless, by analogy to art. 1990, the promise could still be revoked for just cause.

16See G. Sbisà, La promessa al pubblico (1974), 272.

17F. Carnelutti, ‘Del recesso unilaterale nel mandato di commercio’, in F. Larnelutti, Studi di diritto commerciale (1917), 26, n. 11.

18See, e.g., Sbisà, La promessa al pubblico; C.A. Graziani, ‘Le promesse unilaterali’, in Rescigno, Tratt. di dir. priv. 9 (1982), 661.

19G. Gorla, ‘Promesse “condizionate” ad una prestazione’, Riv. dir. com. I (1968), 431.

20See, e.g., R. Sacco, ‘Il Contratto’, in Vassalli, Tratt. di dir. civ. 6:2 (1975), 32 ff.; C. A. Graziani, ‘Le promesse unilaterali’; P. Spada, ‘Cautio quae indiscrete loquitur: lineamenti funzionali e strutturali della promessa di pagamento’, Riv. dir. civ. (1978), 742 n. 173.

21Article 1333 of the Civil Code: ‘Contract binding on offeror only: An offer for the purpose of forming a contract that creates obligations only for the offeror is irrevocable as soon as it comes to the knowledge of the party to whom it is directed. The offeree can reject the offer within the time requested by the nature of the transaction or by usage. In the absence of such rejection the contract is concluded.’

22See, e.g., G. Gorla, ‘Promesse “condizionate” ad una prestazione’; Sbisà, La promessa al pubblico; G. Castiglia, ‘Promesse unilaterali atipiche’, Riv. dir. com. I (1983), 378.

23Article 1327 of the Civil Code: ‘Performance before reply by acceptor: When, at the request of the offeror or by the nature of the transaction or according to usage, the performance should take place without a prior reply, the contract is concluded at the time and place in which performance begins. The acceptor must promptly give notice of the beginning of performance to the other party and, if he does not, is liable for damages.’