elements and constitute a combination of various nominate or innominate contracts. 7.2.3.1. Types of Mixed Contracts In the doctrine and jurisprudence there are two types of mixed contracts: the mixed-typical and the mixed-morphic ones. Mixed-typical contracts constitute a combination of several contracts, in the sense that they are composed of the essential elements (essentialia negotii) of several contractual types. A mixedmorphic contract exists when the essential characteristics of the contract fall under a specific regulated contractual type but the contract in question also contains other elements that make it different64. 7.2.3.2. Applicable Law on Mixed Contracts For the choice of applicable law on mixed contracts, many different theories have been formulated65. Previously, the “absorption theory” was supported. Aiming at the unity of the contract, it was considered that the dominant contractual performance (and the nominated contract type from which it derives) absorbs the remaining (secondary) performances (deriving from other nominated contract types) and prevails over them as regards the choice of the contractual type whose legal framework is applicable, after the classification66. On the contrary, the so called “conjunction theory”, i.e. that the different performances which are exchanged are not always in a relation of primary and secondary among themselves67, aims at analysing the mixed contract and matching each element with the type that fits best and finally applying in (ed.), Zürcher Kommentar Vorbemerkungen zum 8. Titel (Art. 253 - 273c OR) Art. 253 - 265 OR, Die Miete, 5. Aufl., Schulthess: Zürich, 2019, Art. 253-273c OR N 198 et seq., 214; Art. 262 N. 61 et seq.] or as an innominate contract similar to a contract for work and services [Gaudenz G. Zindel, Urs Pulver & Bertrand G. Schott, in Heinrich Honsell, Nedim Peter Vogt & Wolfgang Wiegand (ed.), Basler Kommentar, Obligationenrecht I, Art. 1-529 OR, 6. Aufl., Schulthess: Basel 2015, Vor Art. 363-379 OR N 19]. Moreover, the catering contract (in German: “Gastaufnahmevertrag”) is specifically characterized by the Swiss Federal Supreme Court (Bundesgericht - BGer) as a “peculiar sui generis contract”, BGE 108 II 449 S. 452 (arrêt de la Ire Cour civile du 19 octobre 1982), N 3 a. 64 Stathopoulos & Karampatzos, supra n. 10, Nos. 29-30, 48, 345; Kornilakis, supra n. 49. 65 Amstutz & Morin, supra n. 9, No. Ν 13 et seq.; Georgios Dellios, Zur Präzisierung der Rechtsfindungsmethode bei “gemischten” Verträgen, Doctoral Thesis, Regensburg, 1981 (passim). 66 Stathopoulos & Karampatzos, supra n. 10, Nos. 29-30; Amstutz & Morin, supra n. 9, No. 17; Kornilakis, supra n. 49, § 4 No. 5 et seq.; Apostolos Georgiades, Enchireidio Eidikou Enochikou Dikaiou [= Handbook: Law of Obligations - Special Part], 2nd ed., 2024, Publications P. N. Sakkoulas: Athens, § 3 No. 22-23. 67 Stathopoulos & Karampatzos, supra n. 10, Nos. 29-30; Amstutz & Morin, supra n. 9, No. 18-20; Kornilakis, supra n. 49; Georgiades, supra n. 66, § 3 No. 24 et seq. 75 THE (RESTAURANT) CATERING CONTRACT IN TOURISM
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==