Classifying precontractual liability: a comparative analysis

Legal Studies ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 153-191 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joachim Dietrich
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Tort Law ◽  
Contract Law ◽  
Common Elements ◽  
Ongoing Debate ◽  
Unjust Enrichment ◽  
The Common ◽  
Initial Focus

The common law has solved questions of liability arising in the context of precontractual negotiations by resort to a range of different doctrines and approaches, adopting in effect ‘piecemeal’ solutions to questions of precontractual liability. Consequently, debate has arisen as to how best to classify or categorise claims for precontractual work and as to which doctrines are best suited to solving problems arising from anticipated contracts. The purpose of this article is to consider this question of how best to classify (cases of) precontractual liability. The initial focus will be on the ongoing debate as to whether principles of contract law or principles of unjust enrichment can better solve problems of precontractual liability. I will be suggesting that unjust enrichment theory offers little by way of explanation of cases of precontractual liability and, indeed, draws on principles of contract law in determining questions of liability for precontractual services rendered, though it does so by formulating those principles under different guises. Irrespective, however, of the doctrines utilised by the common law to impose liability, it is possible to identify a number of common elements unifying all cases of precontractual liability. In identifying such common elements of liability, it is necessary to draw on principles of both contract and tort law. How, then, should cases of precontractual liability best be classified? A consideration of the issue of classification of precontractual liability from a perspective of German civil law will demonstrate that a better understanding of cases of precontractual liability will be gained by classifying such cases as lying between the existing categories of contract and tort.

Personalized Legal Areas

2021 ◽  
pp. 61-84
Author(s):  
Omri Ben-Shahar ◽  
Ariel Porat
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Tort Law ◽  
Contract Law ◽  
Standards Of Care ◽  
Criminal Sanctions ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law

This chapter illustrates personalized law “in action” by examining it in three areas of the law: standards of care under the common law tort doctrine of negligence, mandated consumer protections in contract law, and criminal sanctions. In each area, the chapter examines personalization of commands along several dimensions. In tort law, standards of care could vary according to each injurer’s riskiness and skill, to reduce the costs of accidents. In contract law, mandatory protections could vary according to the value they provide each consumer and differential cost they impose on firms, to allocate protections where, and only where, they are justified. And in criminal law, sanctions would be set based on what it takes to deter criminals, accounting for how perpetrators differ in their motives and likelihood of being apprehended, with the potential to reduce unnecessary harsh penalties.

Formation of Contract and Stipulations for Third Parties in Indonesia

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary F Bell
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Essential Element ◽  
Contract Law ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Legal Tradition ◽  
The World ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law

Indonesia is one of the most legally diverse and complex countries in the world. It practises legal pluralism with three types of contract law in force: adat (customary) contract laws, Islamic contract laws (mostly concerning banking), and the European civil law of contract, transplanted from the Netherlands in 1847, found mainly in the Civil Code (Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata). This chapter focuses on European civil law as it is the law used for the majority of commercial transactions. The civil law of contract is not well developed and there is a paucity of indigenous doctrine and jurisprudence, since most significant commercial disputes are settled by arbitration. The contours of the law are consistent with the French/Dutch legal tradition. In the formation of contracts, the subjective intention of the parties plays a greater role than in the common law. As with most jurisdictions with a Napoleonic tradition, the offer must include all the essential element of the contract, there is no concept of ‘invitations to treat’ or of ‘consideration’, the common law posting rule is rejected, and the contract is formed only when the acceptance is received. There are generally few requirements of form but some contracts must be in writing and some in a notarial deed.

THE THOUGHTS ON THE DIFFERENCES IN THE CONTRACT LAW TRADITIONS IN THE COMMON LAW AND THE CIVIL LAW LEGAL SYSTEMS

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 108-116
Author(s):  
K.A. USACHEVA
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Contract Law ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
The Common

The extent to which the contract law traditions in the common law systems really differs from those in the civil law ones is discussed in the article. Today, the existence of such differences is difficult to reject, but their modern description looks more like rough cartoon sketches, which do not take into account lots of additional factors. The article proposes considering this matter more carefully.

Illegal Earnings

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 54-80
Author(s):  
James Goudkamp ◽  
Lorenz König
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Tort Law ◽  
Contract Law ◽  
Private Law ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Considerable Promise ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law

AbstractThis article addresses the principles of tort law that govern claims in respect of lost illegal earnings. It focuses on common law jurisdictions (and the law in the United Kingdom in particular) where such claims, despite apparently being commonplace, have been largely ignored by academics. It describes the existing law and calls in aid in this regard a four-fold taxonomy of cases. The article then turns attention to how claims in respect of lost illegal earnings ought to be decided. At this juncture, the article looks to ideas emanating from German tort law, which has developed a highly sophisticated jurisprudence on the subject of illegal earnings. The German approach, stated simply, requires tort law to defer to rules in other departments of private law. If, for example, contract law would not protect an interest that a claimant has in a particular transaction by reason of the transaction being tainted with illegality, tort law will not allow a claimant indirectly to obtain the benefits of that transaction via a claim for lost illegal earnings. It is argued that the German solution holds considerable promise and merits consideration as a serious alternative to the significantly more complicated principles that the common law courts have developed, which principles currently lack any thoroughgoing rationalisation.

scholarly journals Confidentiality - A Two-Appeal Principle

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 53
Author(s):  
Dr. Brunela Kullolli
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Contract Law ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
The Third ◽  
Article Analysis ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Moment ◽  
Contractual Relation

This article analysis relates to the creation of conditions for the conclusion of the contract.This is the moment when the negotiating parties determine whether there will be a contract or not. This is the stage that in the best case is finalized with the contract signing.Known as the pre-contractual stage, it is considered as the foundation of the contractual relationship.Conduct in good faith at the stage of entering into a contract would also avoid causing potential damages and liability".- The first part gives , of Completion of the contract in good faith, is a legal requirement under the Civil Laë tradition, but unlike the requirement for pre-contractual trust, finds place in the Common Law tradition.In this part of the study, the detailed treatment of the manner of performance of the contract will be set aside, focusing mainly on the obligations that dictate its fulfillment in good faith and the liability incurred in the event of its absence . The second part is concentrated, Contract Interpretation. The third part will be treated as a brief and comparative overview of the common law of Civil Law in the interpretation of the contract, taking into account the main interpretative criteria, to underline the main differences between them. Among all the criteria, the focus will be on trust, which is sanctioned as a special criterion of interpretation by the Civil Law countries. The fourth part analysis the validity of the contract.In this last part of the chapter, I will try to clarify the confusion created between the rules of contract validity and the rules of conduct, as well as the role and impact of the breach of the trust principle in the validity of the contract. Conclusions .Regarding the situations that arise for the damage that comes to the parties from non-fulfillment of obligations and breach of the principle of good faith during the contract's formation, it is necessary to clarify how the type of damage that came during the pre-contractual phase and which interest has failed to realize one of the parties. In fact, this is a genuine duty of the court which, as the case may be, must specify exactly: the responsibility of the parties, the interest that has been violated, the type of damage that has been caused.Keywords: contract law ,internal law ,contractual relation,internal contract interpretation, civil law

Judicial Oversight of Procedural Fairness and Propriety in Europe: Diversity Within Commonality

2021 ◽  
pp. 339-366
Author(s):  
Giacinto della Cananea
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Common Core ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Judicial Independence ◽  
Procedural Fairness ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
The Common ◽  
Initial Focus

This chapter explores the common and distinctive elements that emerge from the comparative analysis of legal systems, in terms of commonality and diversity in administrative law. It begins by outlining the main institutional features of the legal systems selected for the comparison, with an initial focus on the idea of a 'divide' between civil law and common law. The two important features of the legal systems examined in this book include judicial independence and judicial specialization. The chapter then discusses the procedural requirements at the heart of the factual analysis. It concludes by reflecting on the relevance and significance of this analysis for the general enquiry concerning the common core of European administrative laws.

La nueva perspectiva de la tutela del error en el moderno derecho de los contratos

2014 ◽  
pp. 863
Author(s):  
Rocío Herrera Blanco
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Contract Law ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
European Contract ◽  
Legal Effect ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Impact ◽  
European Contract Law

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.

scholarly journals The Unjust Enrichment Fallacy And Private Law

2013 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 115-136
Author(s):  
Peter Jaffey
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Legal Reasoning ◽  
Contract Law ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Private Law ◽  
Unjust Enrichment ◽  
The Common

The theory of unjust enrichment – the theory supporting the recognition of a doctrinal category of unjust enrichment – has been accepted across much of the common law world. The recognition of a doctrinal category is not just a matter of presentation. It has a role in legal reasoning that reflects the fact that it is based on a particular principle or distinct justification for a claim. The theory of unjust enrichment is misguided because there is no principle or distinct justification common to the various claims that have been gathered together to form the new category. The theory has appeared attractive, it would seem, not because a plausible version of the principle of unjust enrichment has been identified, but because it has appeared impossible to explain these various claims in any other way, in particular as claims in property or contract. This difficulty has arisen, it is suggested, largely as a result of a mistaken analysis of primary and remedial rights. The article explores these issues with respect to contract law and property law.

Liability in Bailment in Israeli Law — Rethinking Benefit

1997 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 744-753 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shirley Renner
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Tort Law ◽  
Primary Object ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law

While “classical” tort law deals with the liability of those unlawfully in possession of goods for their damage or loss, the law of bailment deals with the liability of those lawfully in possession of goods for their damage or loss.The Israeli statute relating to bailment, The Bailees Law, more closely resembles the law of bailment in common law, than its civil law counterpart, the law of deposit. Similar to the law of bailment in common law, Israel's Bailees Law covers both possession where the primary object is the safekeeping of goods, e.g., a warehouseman, and possession where the primary object is other than safekeeping of goods, e.g., chattel hire, hire of work and labour to be performed upon a chattel, and a pledge.In terms of liability for the loss of or damage to the goods, the Israeli statute roughly resembles the “traditional” law of bailment in the common law, which distinguishes different kinds of bailment according to the existence and location of benefit received.

scholarly journals International trade and transnational law

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 9-34
Author(s):  
Michael Bridge
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Standard Form ◽  
Contract Law ◽  
Historical Survey ◽  
Hard Law ◽  
Key Points ◽  
Uniform Law ◽  
The Common ◽  
Standard Terms

This article deals with the globalisation of contract law. It begins with an historical survey before taking an inventory of the various types of uniform law. These range from 'hard' law, such as multilateral treaties, to 'soft' law, an expression that captures various non-binding instruments that can usefully be employed by contracting parties and sovereign states. These include contractual standard terms (e.g. Incoterms 2020) and standard form contracts (e.g. ISDA contracts), as well as UNCITRAL model laws. The influence of national law in the globalisation process is noted, whether it takes the form of influencing the laws of other states or provides input into the creation of uniform law. The UN Convention on the International Sale of Goods (CISG) is examined at key points with reference to the influence exerted by the civil law and the common law in its creation. The importance of maintaining the uniform character of the CISG is underlined. Finally, the role played by the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts (PICC) is also examined.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document