Precontractual liability in Chilean private international law
| Autor | María Ignacia Vial U. |
| Cargo | Lecturer in Private International Law, Universidad de los Andes (Santiago, Chile) |
| Páginas | 163-183 |
Revista Ius et Prax is, Año 29, Nº 2, 2023
María Ignacia Vial U.
pp. 163 - 183
163
Revista Ius et Praxis
Talca, Chile, 2023
Artículo
Fecha de recepción: 2022-09 -23; fecha d e aceptación: 2023 -03-23
PRECONTRACTUAL LIABILITY IN CHILEAN PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW
La responsabilidad precontractual en el Derecho internacional
privado chileno
MARÍA IGNACIA VIAL U.*
Universidad de los Andes
Abstract**
Chilean law has no specific conflict r ules to determin e the law governing p recontractual lia bility in the
negotiation of international contracts; this absence of rules generates legal uncertainty for the negotiating
parties to these contracts, when linked to Chile. To ascertain this law, Chilean courts need to make an
extensive and teleological interpretation of general conflict rules in force that points to different applicable
laws. It is convenient that this interpretation is done harmoniously by courts following certain gu idelines -as
those given in this paper- to obtain congruent judgements between Chilean courts and foreign competing
courts. These guidelines should be flexible and guarantee a governing law that is predictable, fair, and
reasonably connected to the precontractual claim. De lege ferenda, it is advisable that Chilean Privat e
International law includes specific conflict rules on precontractual liability. They could be modelled on those
of Rome II Regulation and be flexible by using alternative connecting factors that help to ascertain the most
appropriate nation al substantive law to govern cases o n this liability.
Keywords
Conflict rules on p recontractual liability, precontra ctual liability, Chilean Private
International law on precontractual liability.
Resumen
El Derecho Interna cional Privado chilen o carece de nor mas de conflicto esp ecíficas para det erminar la ley
aplicable a la responsabilidad precontractual originada en la negociación de contratos internacionales. Este
vacío legal genera incerteza jurídica p ara las partes que negocian contratos internacionales vinculados con
Chile. Para determ inar esta ley, los tribun ales chilenos deben hacer una interpretación exten siva y teleológica
de las normas gener ales de conflicto chilenas. Es conven iente que la realicen en forma armónica y conforme
a ciertos lineamien tos comunes – como los que aquí se sugieren- para obtener fallos congruentes con los de
tribunales extranjeros con competencia para decidir del mismo asunto. Estos lineamientos deben ser flexibles
para determinar una ley aplicable, predecible, justa y razonablemente conectada con los hechos reclamados.
De lege ferenda, se propone la introducción en el derecho chileno de normas de conflicto específicas que
regulen la responsabilidad precontractual. Estas normas podrían inspirarse en las del Reglamento Ro ma II,
debieran ser flexibles y u tilizar factores de conex ión alternativos para determinar la ley sustantiva n acional
más apropiada para regular los casos internacionales de responsabilidad precontractual.
Palabras clave
Normas de conflicto sobre responsabilidad precontractual, responsabilidad precontractual, Derecho Internacional
Privado Chileno regulador de la responsabilidad precontractual.
* Lecturer in Private International Law , Universidad de los Andes (Santiago, Chi le). PhD King´s College London, email: mivial@uandes.cl,
ORCID 0000-0003-2312-6143.
** The author thanks the Max Planck Institute, Hamburg for the scholarship awarded for this research.
Revista Ius et Prax is, Año 29, Nº 2, 2023
María Ignacia Vial U.
pp. 163 - 183
164
Introduction
The increasing number of judicial cases triggered by the precontractual misconduct of the parties
in the negotiation of international contracts has moved lawmakers, legal scholars, and the judiciary
in many jurisdictions to study the conflict of laws arising from these cases and to enact conflict
rules to determine a suitable law to govern the precontractual liability resulting from them. This
paper analyses Chilean conflict rules on this liability, hereinafter referred to as international
precontractual liability, as opposed to national or domestic precontractual liability.
As will be seen, Chilean law has no specific conflict rules to determine the governing law of
international precontractual liability, though penalizing precontractual liability in domestic cases.
Neither there is case law or legal literature in Chile that could give guidelines to determine the
applicable law to this liability1. Thus, there is now legal uncertainty on the law governing
international precontractual liability for the parties negotiating international contracts linked to
Chile and for the judges and arbitrators that adjudicate cases on this liability in Chile.
Since it is reasonable to foresee that the number of judicial disputes on international
precontractual liability will grow progressively in Chile with the increase of international exchange
between foreigners and parties domiciled, or who own assets in Chile; judges, lawyers and the
parties will need to have recourse to reliable legal studies to guide their legal conduct and
decisions. This paper aims to provide a guideline for them and, in so doing, to fill in the vacuum in
Chilean legal doctrine on the law governing this liability so to increase legal certainty in respect of
this law. Arbitrators might also benefit from this work when applying Chilean conflict rules to
determine the substantive law to adjudicate a case on international precontractual liability2.
This paper is structured in two sections. The first section shows how the doctrine of precontractual
liability has evolved in the substantive and conflict laws of other jurisdictions; its aim is to provide
doctrinal material for the analysis of the Chilean law that will follow. The second section identifies
the Chilean conflict rules governing international precontractual liability and proposes guidelines
for the proper construction and fair application of these conflict rules.
As studying precontractual liability is complex because precontractual problems are multifarious
and triggered by a great variety of facts with different legal solutions amongst jurisdictions, this
paper sets some research boundaries. It assumes that precontractual liability is a type of non-
contractual obligation and limits its scope of study to common cases of precontractual liability.
Consequently, this paper does not study other cases of precontractual liability as, for example, that
arisen from the physical damage suffered by one party during the contractual negotiation inside
the place of business of the counterparty. Besides, it does not deal with the problem of ascertaining
the international jurisdiction of courts in cases on precontractual liability, because this problem is
governed by other specific conflict rules.
1. Precontractual liability in domesti c substantive law and Private International Law
1.1. The growing complexity of the negotiation of international contracts and the
development of the doctrine of precontractual liability
It is well known that the world economic development and globalization process have led to a rise
of international contracting, along with a more complex negotiation of international contracts.
Hence, the traditional domestic rules governing the contract formation, as the offer and
acceptance, the counteroffer and the withdrawal or rejection of the offer; do not accommodate
well to the various and complex stages, steps and documents that are currently exchanged
between the parties while negotiating international contracts. These contracts are many times
contained in one or various lengthy documents, which the parties sign in several copies and
1 Precontractual liability has not been analyzed in the Chilean Pr ivate International Law studies on non-contractual liability; see:
DOMÍNGUEZ (1966), p. 313; R AMÍREZ (2013), p. 245, VILLARROE L AND VILLARROEL (2015), p. 364.
2 Law 19.971 of 2004; UNCITRAL Model Law on In ternational Commercial Arbitration, 1985, art. 28 N° 2.
Para continuar leyendo
Solicita tu prueba