王轩军

在国际交易中，当事人在为订立合同而启动的谈判过程中可能表达很多意思，那么如何将要约与其他意思表示相区别呢，根据国际商事合同通则2016第2.1.2条及部分注释、示例1和3，必须具有两个要件（即具有确定性和受约束的意思）的提议才是要约。下面我说说这两个要件。

第一、要约必须具有确定性，即一经承诺合同即可成立的意思充分确定。

由于只需承诺要约，合同即可成立，因此要约自身对于将来即将达成的条款必须已经有充分确定的表述。一项特定的提议是否满足这一要件不能通过一般性的条款来确定。即使要约未确定实质性条款，如没有对所交付的商品或所提供的服务的准确描述、没有所支付的价格、履约时间或地点等，也不必然导致要约缺乏足够的确定性。一切都取决于要约人通过发出要约、受要约人通过作出承诺，是否有意达成一个有约束力的协议，以及缺少的条款是否能够根据《通则》有关规定来确定或补充，或根据有关交易习惯或惯例来的确定。

例如，A与 B 已连续多年续签合同，由 B 为 A 的计算机提供技术服务。 A 又设立了一个办公室，用的是同一型号的计算机，要求 B 为其新计算机也提供服务。 B 做出了承诺。尽管 A 的要约并没有明确协议的所有条款，但该合同也成立，因为空缺的条款可以引用已经成为该当事人之间交易习惯的先前合同中的相关条款。

第二、要约必须具有受约束的意思，即要约人表明在收到承诺时愿受其约束的意思。

因为这种意思很少明确表示，通常必须根据个案的具体情况去推定。提议人提出建议的方式（例如明确指出它为“要约”或仅作为“意向声明”）仅对于査明有关意思表示提供了一个初步的但不是决定性的参考，因为更为重要的是要看建议的内容和接收人。一般而言，建议越详细和明确，越有可能被解释为一项要约。

例如，A是一家政府机构，为建立一个新的电话网络刊登招标公告。这种公告仅仅是要约邀请， A 可以接受也可以不接受据此提交的要约。然而，如果该公告中详细说明了这个项目的技术规格，并表示合同将由符合技术规格的、报价最低的投标人获得，则该公告构成要约，其结果是，一旦查明报价最低的投标，合同即告成立。

通则2016第2.1.2条及部分注释、示例1和3的英文原文如下：

ARTICLE 2.1.2

(Definition of offer)

A proposal for concluding a contract constitutes an offer if it is sufficiently definite and

indicates the intention of the offeror to be bound in case of acceptance.

COMMENT

In defining an offer as distinguished from other communications which a party may make in the course of negotiations initiated with a view to concluding a contract, this Article lays down two requirements: the proposal must (i) be sufficiently definite to permit the conclusion of the contract by mere acceptance and (ii) indicate the intention of the offeror to be bound in case of acceptance.  

1. Definiteness of an offer

Since a contract is concluded by the mere acceptance of an offer, the terms of the future agreement must already be indicated with sufficient definiteness in the offer itself. Whether a given offer meets this requirement cannot be established in general terms. Even essential terms, such as the precise description of the goods or the services to be delivered or rendered, the price to be paid for them, the time or place of performance, etc., may be left undetermined in the offer without necessarily rendering it insufficiently definite: all depends on whether or not the offeror by making the offer, and the offeree by accepting it, intend to enter into a binding agreement, and whether or not the missing terms can be determined by interpreting the language of the agreement in accordance with Articles 4.1 et seq., or supplied in accordance with Articles 4.8 or 5.1.2. Indefiniteness may moreover be overcome by

reference to practices established between the parties or to usages (see Article 1.9), as well as by reference to specific provisions to be found elsewhere in the Principles (e.g. Articles 5.1.6 (Determination of quality of performance), 5.1.7 (Price determination), 6.1.1 (Time of performance), 6.1.6 (Place of performance) and 6.1.10 (Currency not

expressed)).

Illustration

1. A has for a number of years annually renewed a contract with B for technical assistance for A’s computers. A opens a second office with the same type of computers and asks B to provide assistance also for the new computers. B accepts and, despite the fact that A’s offer does not specify all the terms of the agreement, a contract has been concluded since the missing terms can be taken from the previous contracts as constituting a practice established between the parties.

COMMENT

2. Intention to be bound

The second criterion for determining whether a party makes an offer for the conclusion of a contract, or merely opens negotiations, is that party’s intention to be bound in the event of acceptance. Since such an intention will rarely be declared expressly, it often has to be inferred from the circumstances of each individual case. The way in which the proponent presents the proposal (e.g. by expressly defining it as an “offer” or as a mere “declaration of intent”) provides a first, although not a decisive, indication of possible intention. Of even greater importance are the content and the addressees of the proposal. Generally speaking, the more detailed and definite the proposal, the more likely it is to be construed as an offer. A proposal addressed to one or more specific persons is more likely to be intended as an offer than is one made to the public at large.

Illustration

3. A, a Government agency, advertises for bids for the setting up of a new telephone network. Such an advertisement is merely an invitation to submit offers, which may or may not be accepted by A. If, however, the advertisement indicates in detail the technical specifications of the project and states that the contract will be awarded to the lowest bid conforming to the specifications, it may amount to an offer with the consequence that the contract will be concluded once the lowest bid has been identified.