law-contract

asgard-ai-platform ｜ 商業與營運 ｜ 原文 ｜ MIT

審閱契約的成立要件、必備條款和常見風險條款

---
name: "law-contract"
description: "分析契約的基本要素，包括成立要件（要約、承諾、對價）、必備條款與常見的風險區域。當使用者需要審閱契約、理解契約條款、找出有風險的條款，或擬定契約條文時使用，即使他們說的是「審閱這份合約」「這份契約我要注意什麼」或「這個條款是標準的嗎」也適用。"
metadata:
  category: "WP-20 法學院"
  tags: ["law", "contract", "legal-analysis"]
---

# 契約分析

## 概述

契約法規範具有執行力的協議。這個 skill 涵蓋商業契約的成立要件、必備條款與常見的風險區域。內容屬於教育性質的指引，不是法律意見，針對具體情況，一定要諮詢合格的律師。

## 框架

```
鐵律：契約需要要約 + 承諾 + 對價 + 合法性

四個要素必須全部具備，契約才有效。缺任何一個，
就不存在有執行力的契約，不管文件看起來多正式。
沒有對價（價值的交換）的簽署文件，不是契約。
```

### 契約的成立

| 要素 | 定義 | 檢驗 |
|---------|-----------|------|
| **要約** | 明確、確定、有受拘束意思的提議 | 一個理性的人會把它理解成有拘束力的提議嗎？ |
| **承諾** | 對要約條款的無保留同意 | 鏡像規則：承諾必須與要約完全一致 |
| **對價** | 雙方交換的有價值之物 | 每一方都放棄了某些東西（金錢、服務、權利、承諾） |
| **合法性** | 標的必須合法，當事人必須有行為能力 | 沒有違法的目的；當事人必須是有能力的成年人或有授權的實體 |

### 契約的必備條款

| 條款 | 目的 | 警訊 |
|--------|---------|-----------|
| **當事人** | 誰受拘束 | 實體名稱不正確、沒有簽署權限 |
| **範圍/標的** | 交換的是什麼 | 交付物含糊、用語未定義 |
| **付款條件** | 何時、如何付款 | 沒有付款時程、逾期付款沒有後果 |
| **期間與終止** | 期限與退出條件 | 未經通知就自動續約、沒有因違約而終止的條款 |
| **責任與賠償** | 誰承擔風險 | 無限責任、單方面的賠償 |
| **保密（NDA）** | 資訊保護 | 定義過於寬泛、沒有期限 |
| **智慧財產權歸屬** | 誰擁有產出的成果 | 工作成果的歸屬不明確 |
| **競業禁止** | 終止後的限制 | 範圍/地域/期間過於寬泛 |
| **爭議解決** | 如何解決衝突 | 外國管轄、未經同意的強制仲裁 |
| **不可抗力** | 因不可預見的事件而免除履行 | 定義過窄或過寬 |

### 契約審閱步驟

1. **找出當事人**：誰同意？實體名稱正確嗎？
2. **理解交易內容**：每一方給出什麼、得到什麼？
3. **檢查成立要件**：要約、承諾、對價、合法性，都具備嗎？
4. **審閱必備條款**：用上面的表當檢核清單
5. **標出風險區域**：無限責任、單方面條款、範圍含糊、自動續約
6. **檢查準據法**：適用哪個司法管轄區的法律？爭議解決機制可以接受嗎？

## 輸出格式

```markdown
# 契約審閱：{協議類型}

## 當事人
- 甲方：{名稱、角色}
- 乙方：{名稱、角色}

## 交易摘要
{交換的是什麼，用白話說明}

## 條款審閱
| 條款 | 有無？ | 評估 | 風險等級 |
|--------|---------|-----------|-----------|
| 範圍 | Y/N | {備註} | 🟢/🟡/🔴 |
| 付款 | Y/N | ... | ... |
| 終止 | Y/N | ... | ... |
| 責任 | Y/N | ... | ... |
| 智慧財產權 | Y/N | ... | ... |
| 競業禁止 | Y/N | ... | ... |

## 警訊
1. {具體的疑慮，並附上條款出處}

## 建議
1. {建議的修改}
```

## 範例

### 正確的應用
**情境：** 審閱 SaaS 服務協議
- **警訊**：「供應商得以 30 天的通知調整價格」 → 單方面的調價條款。應該是：合約期間內價格鎖定，只在續約時調整。
- **警訊**：「客戶就所有請求向供應商負賠償責任」 → 單方面的賠償。應該是雙方互相賠償。
- **缺漏**：沒有定義 SLA（服務水準協議） → 服務中斷時無從追索。建議加入附帶補償點數的可用時間承諾 ✓

### 不正確的應用
- 「這份契約看起來沒問題，因為雙方都簽了」 → 簽名不會讓每個條款都公平或有執行力。必須審閱個別的條款內容。簽署過的契約裡若有顯失公平的條款，仍可能被挑戰。

## 常見陷阱

- **「標準契約」不代表公平：** 供應商擬定的「標準」契約，是偏向供應商的。一切都可以談。
- **台灣特有的情況：** 台灣的民法規範契約。與普通法的主要差異：沒有對價的要求（以承諾換承諾就足夠）、某些契約類型（勞動、消費）有強制規定。
- **自動續約陷阱：** 許多契約除非在到期前 30-90 天通知，否則會自動續約。把通知的期限記進行事曆。
- **這個 skill 不是法律意見：** 它提供的是契約概念的教育性分析。要做有拘束力的法律決定，一定要諮詢有執照的律師。

## 參考資料

- 台灣特有的契約法（民法），見 `references/taiwan-contract-law.md`
- 常見的契約範本，見 `references/contract-templates.md`

---
name: "law-contract"
description: "Analyze contract fundamentals including formation requirements (offer, acceptance, consideration), essential clauses, and common risk areas. Use this skill when the user needs to review a contract, understand contract terms, identify risky clauses, or draft contract provisions — even if they say 'review this agreement', 'what should I watch out for in this contract', or 'is this clause standard'."
metadata:
  category: "WP-20 法學院"
  tags: ["law", "contract", "legal-analysis"]
---

# Contract Analysis

## Overview

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.

## Framework

```
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

| 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 |

### Essential Contract Clauses

| 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 |

### Contract Review Steps

1. **Identify the parties**: Who is agreeing? Are entity names correct?
2. **Understand the deal**: What is each side giving and receiving?
3. **Check formation elements**: Offer, acceptance, consideration, legality — all present?
4. **Review essential clauses**: Use the table above as a checklist
5. **Flag risk areas**: Unlimited liability, one-sided terms, vague scope, auto-renewal
6. **Check governing law**: Which jurisdiction's law applies? Is the dispute resolution mechanism acceptable?

## Output Format

```markdown
# Contract Review: {Agreement Type}

## Parties
- Party A: {name, role}
- Party B: {name, role}

## Deal Summary
{What is being exchanged — in plain language}

## 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 | ... | ... |

## Red Flags
1. {specific concern with clause reference}

## Recommendations
1. {suggested modification}
```

## Examples

### Correct Application
**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 ✓

### Incorrect Application
- "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.

## Gotchas

- **"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.

## References

- For Taiwan-specific contract law (Civil Code), see `references/taiwan-contract-law.md`
- For common contract templates, see `references/contract-templates.md`