专业团队

签订一个合同，当事人肯定希望是有效合同，不存在无效的问题。但是发生纠纷的时候，就需要证明合同的有效性，那么合同有效证明的条件有哪些?

一、合同有效证明的条件有哪些?

1、行为人具有相应的民事行为能力;

2、意思表示真实;

3、不违反法律或者社会公共利益。

因为上述三个条件是民事行为能够合法的一般准则，当然也应适用于当事人签订合同这种民事行为。

二、合同无效的行为

根据《民法通则》第58条的规定，以下情形的民事行为无效：

1、当事人是无民事行为能力人实施的;

2、限制民事行为能力人依法不能独立实施的;

3、当事人一方有欺诈胁迫、乘人之危的行为;

4、双方恶意串通损害国家、集体或第三人利益的行为;

5、违反法律或社会公共利益;

6、违反国家指令性计划;

7、以合法形式掩盖非法目的。

但《合同法》第52条却规定：“有下列情形之一的，合同无效：

(一)一方以欺诈、胁迫的手段订立合同，损害国家利益;

(二)恶意串通，损害国家、集体或者第三人利益;

(三)以合法形式掩盖非法目的;

(四)损害社会公共利益;

(五)违反法律、行政法规的强制性规定。”

三、可撤销合同与无效合同的关系

从法律后果上来看二者具有同一性。但两者之间的区别也是比交明显的。可撤销合同与无效合同的区别主要有3个，即：

1、“从内容上来看，可撤销合同主要涉及意思表示不真实的问题。据此，法律将是否主张撤销的权利留给撤销权人，由其决定是否撤销合同。而无效合同在内容上常常违反法律的禁止性规定和社会公共利益。此类行为具有明显的违法性，因此对无效合同的效力的确认不能由当事人选择。即使对无效合同不主张无效，司法机关和仲裁机构也应当主动干预，宣告其无效。”合同无效的主张或请求应当作为合同一方当事人的权利，其有权决定是否行使这一权利。由于原因上文已有较详细的论述，在此不再做论述。

2、可撤销合同未被撤销以前仍然是有效的，而且根据我国《合同法》第54条、第56条的规定来看，撤销权人亦可要求不撤销合同而仅要求对合同予以变更，这就表明了可撤销合同并非都是当然无效，这可由享有撤销权的一方当事人进行选择。

3、对可撤销合同来说，行使撤销权必须符合规定的期限，超过该期限，合同即为有效。但是，无效合同因其为当然无效，不存在期限制问题。首先，请求认定合同无效的权利应为请求权，理所当然应受到正确行使其权利的期限限制。其次，对于一个业已存在甚至履行完毕但却又依法应属无效的合同，更不能让其长久处于无效合同的不确定状态。这样很不利于交易的安全。所以对于当事人请求宣告无效的权利也应规定行使的期限，以保证交易的稳定和安全。

When signing a contract, the parties must hope that it is a valid contract and there is no issue of invalidity. But when a dispute arises, it is necessary to prove the validity of the contract. So, what are the conditions for proving the validity of the contract?

1、 What are the conditions for proving the validity of a contract?

1. The actor has corresponding civil capacity;

2. The expression of intention is true;

3. Not violating the law or public interest.

Because the above three conditions are general criteria for the legality of civil acts, they should also apply to civil acts where the parties sign contracts.

2、 The act of invalidating a contract

According to Article 58 of the General Principles of Civil Law, the following civil acts are invalid:

1. The parties involved are persons without civil capacity to carry out the act;

2. Individuals with limited capacity for civil conduct are unable to independently implement it in accordance with the law;

3. One party has engaged in fraudulent coercion or taken advantage of others;

4. The act of malicious collusion between two parties to harm the interests of the state, collective, or third parties;

5. Violation of laws or public interests;

6. Violation of national mandatory plans;

7. Covering up illegal purposes in a legal form.

However, Article 52 of the Contract Law stipulates: "If any of the following circumstances occur, the contract shall be invalid:"

（1） One party enters into a contract through fraudulent or coercive means, which harms national interests;

（2） Malicious collusion that harms the interests of the state, collective, or third parties;

（3） Covering up illegal purposes in a legal form;

（4） Harming the public interest of society;

（5） Violation of mandatory provisions of laws and administrative regulations

3、 The relationship between revocable contracts and invalid contracts

From the perspective of legal consequences, the two are identical. But the difference between the two is also more obvious than crossing. There are three main differences between revocable contracts and invalid contracts, namely:

1. From the perspective of content, revocable contracts mainly involve the issue of untrue expression of intention. Therefore, the law leaves the right to assert revocation to the revocation right holder, who decides whether to revoke the contract. However, invalid contracts often violate the prohibitive provisions of the law and the public interest in terms of content. Such behavior has obvious illegality, so the confirmation of the effectiveness of invalid contracts cannot be chosen by the parties. Even if an invalid contract is not claimed to be invalid, judicial and arbitration institutions should actively intervene and declare it invalid The claim or request for invalidity of a contract shall be the right of one party to the contract, who has the right to decide whether to exercise this right. Due to the reasons discussed in detail earlier, we will not discuss them here.

2. Revocable contracts are still valid until they are revoked, and according to the provisions of Article 54 and Article 56 of China's Contract Law, the party with the right of revocation can also request that the contract be amended instead of revoked. This indicates that revocable contracts are not necessarily invalid, and this can be chosen by the party with the right of revocation.

3. For revocable contracts, the exercise of the right of revocation must comply with the prescribed deadline, beyond which the contract is considered valid. However, an invalid contract is naturally invalid and there is no issue of time limit. Firstly, the right to request invalidity of a contract should be a right of request, which should naturally be subject to a time limit for the proper exercise of its rights. Secondly, for a contract that already exists or has been fulfilled but is legally deemed invalid, it should not be left in an uncertain state of invalid contract for a long time. This is not conducive to the security of transactions. Therefore, a deadline for exercising the right of the parties to request invalidation should also be stipulated to ensure the stability and safety of the transaction.