We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Consumers have in law been defined as the weaker parties in a transaction. Contract laws have integrated consumer protection with a view to balancing the interests of the parties, ensuring equal bargaining power and to some extent substantive fairness in contractual relations. Rules of consumer protection have therefore, from a contract lawyer’s perspective, been construed as expressions of a general principle of equality. The principle of equality, conceived in this way, complements the general principle of autonomy underlying contract law, which embodies the idea that parties should have the capacity for self-realisation. Does this construction of consumer contract law still hold in EU consumer markets transformed by the rise of online platforms and the overall move towards an economy based on services and experiences rather than the sale of physical goods? Or do we need to redefine the ways in which the principle of equality is expressed in European contract law in order to correct for new inequalities arising between consumers and businesses? This article aims to answer that question against the backdrop of established insights of the ways in which the rationality of European contract law differs from that of national, doctrinal private law systems. It concludes that the rules laid down in instruments such as the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (UCPD) and the Unfair Contract Terms Directive (UCTD) can protect consumers against exploitative practices. However, problems arise in cases where the interest at stake go beyond economic interests and concern also non-economic interests, such as data protection or freedom of expression, or do not have a market exchange value. Solutions can be pursued, it is submitted, by the European legislator and the European Court of Justice, potentially using the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights as a catalyst for reform.
Legal technologies using AI-augmented algorithms to translate the purpose of a law into a specific legal directive can be used to produce self-driving contracts, that is, a contract which instead of relying on a human referee to fill gaps, update, or reform the provisions of the contract, uses data-driven predictive algorithms to do so instead. Self-driving contracts are not simply science fiction; not only are self-driving contracts possible, they are in fact already with us.
AI has the potential to overcome problems concerning the existing approaches to contract drafting, management and implementation, whilst also having the potential to exacerbate these problems. To deal with this risk and to create AI which is trustworthy in relation to contracting, such systems require channelling in a new direction, termed ‘transactional responsibility’. Legal regulation must be structured around the entirety of the socio-technical system which underpins AI.
Law and economics scholarship has traditionally analyzed efficient breach cases monolithically. By grouping efficient breach cases together, this literature treats the subjective motives and the distributive effects of the breach as immaterial. The Restatement (Third) of Restitution and Unjust Enrichment introduced a distinction based on the intent and the effects of the breach, allowing courts to use disgorgement remedies in cases of ‘opportunistic’ breach of contract (i.e., ‘deliberate and profitable’ breaches). In this article, we evaluate this approach, focusing on the effects of disgorgement remedies on allocative and productive efficiency, information-forcing and competitive effects, and restraint of breach-searching incentives. We show that, even from a purely consequentialist perspective, disgorgement remedies may be normatively warranted, especially when involving sellers’ breach. Recent experimental evidence revealed that the preferences and reactions of ordinary people are in line with our evaluation of the effects of opportunistic breach.
This chapter responds to leading arguments about contract remedies, including the theory of efficient breach, contract interpretation, rules of disclosure (or permitting nondisclosure), consideration, and other topics in contract law. It shows how little progress the law-and-economics movement has made in understanding most areas of contract law, despite the obvious connections between contracts and economics.
This chapter aims to identify and analyze Western influences – French, German and English – that played into the conception of contractual consent emanating from the PRC CC provisions on contracts. Looking to the Chinese treatment of contract formation, contract interpretation, mistake as to present or future facts, good faith and abuse of rights, contractual fairness in the context of standard form contracts and some aspects of contract remedies, it is determined that the Chinese code provisions on contract on the whole clearly motion to a continental (French/German) rather than English model, the only exception perhaps being with respect to the duty to inform, which the Chinese code refrains from explicitly endorsing. As between French and German influences, moreover, the PRC CC seems more heavily suffused with the latter, it coming closest to French law only with respect to mistake as to present facts and certain aspects of good faith – at least insofar as the Chinese conception of delictual liability can be analogized to the French, which remains to be seen.
This chapter explores why Swiss law is very frequently chosen as the law applicable to international commercial contracts. This chapter reviews the statistics of the ICC and the Swiss Arbitration Centre as well as surveys carried out of international commercial actors confirming that Swiss law is one of the most popular laws chosen to govern the parties’ contract. This chapter then goes on to analyse the reasons cited for the popularity of Swiss law as the law governing the parties’ contract, namely the parties’ freedom to agree on the rights and obligations in their contractual relationship, the perceived neutrality of Swiss contract law, the suitability of Swiss law to cross-cultural relationships, its commonalities with laws of several Civil law jurisdictions, namely French and German law, the fact that the Swiss Code of Obligations is concise and easily accessible and the attractiveness of Switzerland as a seat of arbitration.
This book provides a systematic presentation of the most important commercial contracts under Swiss law, i.e., the contract of sale, the contract for work and services, the simple mandate contract, and the commercial agency contract, as well as the licence agreement, the exclusive distribution agreement, and the settlement agreement. The book also contains an in-depth introduction of the Swiss law of obligations, covering topics such as the fundamental principles of contract law, the obligation (as the effect of the contract), the formation of contracts, contract interpretation, validity of contracts, agency, general terms and conditions, and breach of contract. After English law, Swiss law is deemed to be the most attractive law applicable to the parties' contract in an international context. At the same time, English is usually chosen as the language of the arbitration proceedings. This book will therefore be an indispensable resource for all English-speaking lawyers interested in international commercial arbitration.
Our penultimate chapter explores the extent to which the Tudor period saw a legal renaissance. It examines developments in the common law courts but also explores the development of new conciliar courts outside the common law, most notably star chamber and the court of equity, which were to prove influential. It also examines the further rise in the use and importance of statute law in this period, demonstrating that the Reformation statutes that split England from the Roman Catholic Church underscored the power of Parliamentary statute. Attention is also given to some developments in the common law courts during this period concerning the law of obligations (the development of the principle of consideration in contract law), property law (the development of the writ of ejectment that replaced the older land law writs and the origins of the law of trusts) and criminal law (the development of the distinction between murder and manslaughter).
This chapter completes our examination of the long Plantagenet period, which culminated in the bloody War of the Roses. However, as the chapter title makes plain, the focus is on the impact that the deadly plague of this period had upon law and order. The chapter explores the different interpretations made of the importance of the Black Death and surveys developments of this period such as the origins of what we would today call employment law, significant increases in the effectiveness of the administration of justice chiefly through increased powers for justices of the peace and important developments in both law of obligations (exploring how actions on the case developed from the writ of trespass and how it further developed into the action on the case for assumpsit) and the criminal law (focusing on treason and murder).
The title of this chapter on ‘The English Justinian (c. 1272–1307)’ refers to the nickname given to Edward I who was likened to the Roman Emperor Justinian I who codified Roman law on the basis that Edward’s reign saw a significant increase in the number and importance of statutes. It falls into three sections. The first will discuss the main statutes of Edward I, focusing on the Statute of Westminster 1275, the Statute of Wales 1284 and the Statute of Westminster II 1285. The second part will examine statutes that had a particular effect upon feudalism: the Statute of Mortmain 1279 and Quia Emptores 1290 (also known as the Statute of Westminster III). The third and final section will explore a development in the common law that began before this time but blossomed in this period: the origins of what is now known as the law of obligations or the law of contract and tort (examining the writs of covenant and trespass). This underlines that, although the English Justinian is known for the growth of statute law, the era also saw the continued development of the common law.
This comment aims to show how Klaus Eller's paper on ‘The Political Economy of Tenancy Contract Law’1 raises the stakes of private law scholarship and contributes to the larger project of remodeling legal institutions in a progressive direction. The comment starts by contextualising the rapid spread of the Law and Political Economy (LPE) movement; illustrates through examples the generative impact of LPE on contemporary contracts scholarship; and highlights two strands of Eller’s original contribution to such literature: a welcome reflection on the value and limits of Materialisierung, and a radical widening of the private law inquiry to include institutional dimensions of legal reform. The point of fostering such new directions is not to ditch the very logic of private law and its endogenous mechanisms of justice, which are still essential to progressive legal work. What is no longer tenable is to keep seeking socially oriented solutions exclusively within the private law arsenal of possibilities, even when it has become obvious that only a synergic approach can produce accurate diagnoses of – and perhaps cures for – the structural predicaments of the market economy.
Europe’s aggravating housing crisis lies in the blind spots of law. While central in constructing housing both as a home and as an asset, law bears the task of mediating between housing’s multiple – social, economic, and cultural – dimensions. However, inner-legal fragmentation and a legal imaginary of property, the nation state, and its welfare system have depoliticized, deflected and rendered inaccessible the ‘housing question’. Turning to tenancy contract law in particular, this article argues that the ‘social’ orientation of this early example of a ‘materialised’ field of contract law is not only ill-suited to reflect the recent structural shifts in the housing market brought about through financialisation. Tenancy contract law has effectively taken a conservative drift by claiming to adequately administer the bilateral landlord–tenant relation while being insensitive to macro-level developments. Tenancy contract law reindividualises tenant responsibility in the eye of hardships whose roots lie outside the contractual sphere and thereby furthers, rather than curtails, neoliberal housing policies. As a reaction, the article proposes political economy as a conceptual vantage point from which to develop a ‘holistic housing law’. Such a perspective combines a concern for democratic and collective agency with careful attention to law’s tacit and technical role in shaping the flow of finance and the techniques of landlords’ governmentality. Part of this is a ‘transformative tenancy law’, to be reformulated to protect not against landlord bargaining power in the first place but against a hegemonic and expansive market rationality that structurally corrupts the social and material meaning of housing.
This article explores the doctrine of separability, as understood in particular in the English legal tradition. It does so by reference to the decisions in Sulamérica Cia Nacional de Seguros SA and others v Enesa Engelharia SA and others and ENKA İnşaat ve Sanayi A.Ş. v OOO ‘Insurance Company Chubb’ & Ors that explore the relevance of the concept when determining the law applicable to the arbitration agreement. These decisions largely treat the doctrine as irrelevant to the determination of the law governing the arbitration agreement. They do so because of the way in which English law views separability as tied inimically to the concept of enforcement of the arbitration agreement. This is unsurprising given the content of section 7 of the Arbitration Act 1996 and the position of the doctrine of separability as a legal fiction that must be restricted to its defined purpose. Viewed against the potential reform of the Arbitration Act 1996, the author asks whether a broader view of separability can be adopted. The author's view is that there are cogent and compelling reasons for adopting a broader view, that would promote certainty and consistency in a way that is not best served by the current approach.
This chapter analyzes reciprocity in the social sciences, historical forms of law, and domestic contexts, including the law of contracts and in federal States, to shed light upon some of reciprocity’s fundamental characteristics. Reciprocity is not incompatible with the existence of a community, but necessarily requires a social relation, and one of its defining characteristics is its relationship with equality. Rather than being a negative concept, based on occasional and discontinued instances of interaction on the basis of reactions to conduct, reciprocity is a concept fundamental to the existence of social relations, and inherent to ideas of justice and fairness.
According to the “Inadequacy Thesis”, the law's refusal to extend the tort of conversion to interferences with contractual rights is evidence of systemic ossification and proof of its failure to protect the most valuable asset class in the modern economy. Whilst it is true that, like chattels, the benefit of contractual rights can be usurped by third parties, transforming such rights into objects of property is the wrong solution to the problem. This article departs from previous analyses by stressing that the analogue of acts of interference with contractual rights is not the conversion of a chattel but a “triangle dispute”. The problem raised by triangle disputes is not how to reach the primary wrongdoer, but how to allocate the loss between the innocent parties. Invoking the concept of “property” cannot solve this problem. Its efficient solution is to be found in better contracts, not more property.
This article explores the concept of consideration in contract law from a comparative perspective, looking at how English law and German law distinguish bargains from gifts. Contrary to the orthodoxy that consideration is unique to Common Law and absent from Civil Law, the bidirectional analysis in this article shows how English law and German law can be understood to fulfil a comparable function and can thus inform and benefit each other. The sophisticated English doctrine can be used to refine the rather imprecise German definition of gifts, whilst the understanding of English authorities can profit from reflecting inversely on the criterion of gratuitousness in German law.
This chapter sets out the main objectives and major themes of the work. The overall aim of the project is to establish the implications of a diminishing contract law (common law in particular).By ‘diminishment’ is meant the return to formal and classical law values in the common law and a reduced field of application for the rules of contract law. A brief outline is given of the topics that are explored during the course of the book: the rise of private ordering through contracts and the legal response to this; the ‘contractualisation’ of society; the formalist turn in modern contract law; the likely future pressures on legal development (such as ‘smart contracts’).The chapter raises some initial arguments concerning the drawbacks of a diminishing contract law (lack of development of public rules of contract law; lack of legal scrutiny of many modern contracts, or aspects of them; lack of opportunity for courts to express and apply the normative values that should underpin contracting). The chapter also anticipates, and responds to, some initial questions or criticisms about the project.
English contract law provides the invisible framework that underpins and enables much contracting activity in society, yet the role of the law in policing many of our contracts now approaches vanishing point. The methods by which contracts come into existence, and notionally create binding obligations, have transformed over the past forty years. Consumers now enter into contracts through remote and automated processes on standard terms over which they have little control. This book explores the substantive weakening of the institution of contract law in a society heavily dependent on contracts. It considers significant areas of contracting activity that affect many people, but that escape serious and sustained legal scrutiny. An accessibly written and succinct account of contract law's past, present and future, it assesses the implications of a diminished contract law, and the possibilities, if any, for its revival.
Food, more than any other commodity, is surrounded by a vibrant debate concerning competing modes of production, ranging from the preferability of industrial farming as against small-scale farming, to genetically modified production as against organic production and to global production as against local production. The resulting demand for food with specific material and immaterial attributes has contributed to the rise of certification schemes along the value chain. Beyond being mere information intermediaries, such certification schemes can best be understood as ‘polycentric’ governance tools that give voice to non-economic rationalities in governing global production. Put this way, certification e.g. for sustainable food production holds a mirror up to competition law theory. In dealing with such private governance initiatives, competition law finds a pertinent terrain to conceptualize and implement its own ‘polycentric’ objective of constitutionalizing markets. In particular, competition law can and should formulate guidelines to meaningfully distinguish between different private governance initiatives to critically engage with the known flaws in the incentive structure of certification.