scholarly journals THE NEW FRENCH LAW OF CONTRACT

2017 ◽  
Vol 66 (4) ◽  
pp. 805-831 ◽  
Author(s):  
Solène Rowan

AbstractThe article analyses the recent reform of contract law in France. The section of the Civil Code on the law of contract was amended and restructured in its entirety last year. The revised section came into force on 1 October 2016. The article considers its main innovations and compares them with the corresponding principles of English law and some contract law international instruments, mainly the UNIDROIT Principles and the Principles of European Contract Law. The article also assesses whether the new provisions achieve their stated aim of rendering French contract law more accessible, predictable, influential abroad and commercially attractive.

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 445-464
Author(s):  
Mitja Kovač

This paper explores possible uncontemplated effects and behavioural implications created by duty-to-negotiate provisions in international instruments. More precisely, the paper considers how five different international instruments approach the subject, namely the Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG), UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts (PICC), Principles of European Contract Law (PECL), Draft Common Frame of Reference (DCFR) and Common European Sales Law (CESL). The extent to which these international and European legal instruments correspond to recent economic and behavioural findings is examined. Moreover, an economically inspired analysis is conducted of the uncontemplated consequences of the duty to renegotiate that well-intended international lawmakers never anticipated. Further, it is suggested that game theoretical and behavioural reasons might exist for adopting a cautious approach to the duty to renegotiate in instances of unforeseen contingencies as found in the CISG as well as the English, German, US and Scottish law of contracts. JEL classification: C23, C26, C51, K42, O43


2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesco Paolo Patti

AbstractThe rules provided by the civil codes on defects in consent were designed at a time when the notion of consumer law did not exist and fairness at the pre-contractual stage was not widely considered as a value worthy of protection. Matters have changed radically in the last three decades. The proliferation of rules protecting consumers on a European level, especially through information duties and rights of withdrawal, and the growing impact of general clauses, has led to a fragmentation of domestic contract law. This clash of different sets of rules is particularly conspicuous in the field of unfair commercial practices as the European legislator has not made provision for specific private law remedies for individual consumers in cases of misleading and aggressive commercial practices. This article addresses the particular issue of the applicability of the law of fraudulent misrepresentation to cases of misleading commercial practices. The purpose is to reconsider ‘fraud’ in terms of a defect in consent, in a manner that is both more in line with the modern features of European contract law and better able to counteract new market strategies based on exploiting cognitive weaknesses. The focus is thus put on the relationship between pre-contractual information duties and defective consent, as well as on some insights of law and economics, which demonstrate that ‘consent theories’ or ‘will theories’ cannot provide precise criteria to indicate when a contract should be void. In conclusion, a possible legislative intervention aiming to substitute the rules on fraud for a set of remedies for violation of information duties is discussed.


2003 ◽  
Vol 72 (3) ◽  
pp. 341-367
Author(s):  
Ana López-Rodríguez

AbstractThis article deals with some of the issues addressed in the Action Plan on a more coherent European contract law, COM (2003) 68 final, in connection with the Green Paper of the European Commission of 14 January 2003, COM (2003) 654 final, on the conversion of the Rome Convention of 1980 on the law applicable to contractual obligations into a Community instrument and its modernization. It argues ways in which both initiatives may complement each other towards a smoother functioning of the internal market.


2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Muriel Fabre-Magnan

AbstractThe recent reform of French law of contract consecrates and indeed reinforces those mechanisms designed to protect weaker parties that had been recognized progressively by the courts. This is not to say that the brief for contractual justice is now exhausted. Many questions have arisen that are not dealt with by the new legislation, but nor are they by the law of other Member States of the European Union, or indeed by the Common Frame of Reference. Three examples of contemporary problems that contract lawyers should address, are discussed here: access to vital goods and services to persons; the quality of goods and services provided under the contract; and the production process of these goods and services. On these three points, proposals are made which might serve as a basis for a new manifesto for social justice in European contract law.


2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesca Lucchesi

In long-term contracts the topic of contingencies and corrective remedies is particularly important. The BGB (§ 313) and texts that derive from supranational bodies, such as The Principles of European Contract Law, the UNIDROIT Principles and the Draft Common Frame of Reference set out remedies in order to adapt the contract in the event of contingencies and other preconditions. Similar forms of protection are not provided for by the Italian Civil Code, whose remedies in the face of events stemming from a contingency often do not manage to meet the interest to preserve the relationship. The development of the sources highlights in particular the remedy of compensation and specific enforcement of the obligation to conclude a contract set out in art. 2932 of the Italian Civil Code, with important new features with respect to the past. After the direction taken by case law which accepts compensation for damage in the presence of a concluded and valid contract, the compensation remedy assumes the function of correcting the contract and not just upholding the economic operation. In short, what emerges from the compensation and specific protection are facts and operating techniques that justify and enable correction of a contract.


Author(s):  
Rocío Herrera Blanco

Premio de artículos jurídicos «GARCÍA GOYENA» (Curso 2013-2014). Primer accésit Todos los ordenamientos jurídicos europeos prevén normas relativas a la ineficacia de los contratos por vicios del consentimiento, sin embargo, existen entre ellos diferencias bastante significativas, especialmente cuando se comparan el Common Law y los derechos continentales. El presente estudio comparado parte del tratamiento de esta cuestión en la regulación española y se centra en las propuestas que el moderno Derecho de la contratación proporciona en materia de vicios del consentimiento, con particular atención a la figura del error, así como en el Derecho anglosajón, por su eventual influencia en la regulación de estos instrumentos. De manera muy amplia, podríamos decir que el Common Law enfatiza la seguridad de las transacciones, mientras que los sistemas del Civil Law, quizás todavía marcados por las huellas de las llamadas teorías voluntaristas, son más transigentes en permitir la ineficacia de los contratos por defectos del consentimiento. Partiendo de esta premisa, intentaremos evidenciar que las soluciones brindadas por el Derecho anglosajón y los diferentes instrumentos de unificación para la determinación de los efectos jurídicos del error son muy similares. Asimismo, en este trabajo se defiende la tesis de la obsolescencia del Código Civil español en esta materia, y la consecuente necesidad de adaptación del mismo a la actual realidad social, a través de un propósito de homogeneización del Derecho contractual europeo. Para ello, igualmente estudiaremos la Propuesta de modernización del Código civil en materia de obligaciones y contratos, cuya regulación del error, en particular, merece ser objeto de estudio y confrontación de ideas.The legal systems of all european countries provide rules regarding the inefficacy of contracts due to defects of consent, however, there are very significant differences between them, with the deepest differences when Common law and continental systems are contrasted. The present comparative study focuses on the proposals that the modern contract law (PECL, Unidroit Principles, DCFR, CESL) provides with regard to defects of consent and, particularly, to the doctrine of mistake, as well as the Common law for its eventual influence on the regulation of these projects. Very generally, we could say that Common Law emphasizes the security of transactions, while Civil law systems, perhaps still under the impact of the eroded voluntarist theories, are more generous in allowing the inefficacy of contracts due to defects consent. Given these premises, we will try to evidence that the solutions provided by the Common law and the different unifying instruments in order to determinate the legal effect of the defects of consent are very similar. Furthermore, this survey defends the thesis of obsolescence of the spanish Civil Code respecting defects of consent, and the ensuing need for adapting it to the current social reality through a purpose of homogenization of european contract law. Due to this fact, we will also study the Proposal for the modernization of the Civil Code on obligations and contracts, whose regulation of defects of consent, particularly, diserves to be analyzed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document