Freedom of contract as freedom from unconscionable contracts

Ciacchi, Aurelia Colombi

doi:10.1017/cbo9780511760938.002

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…151 It rejects the adoption of evocative and radical views of rethinking the private ordering of the law by replacing the one-dimensional notion of freedom of contract with tangible freedom from unconscionable transactions. 152 To fully disclose the normative meaning of 'freedom of contract' it is salient and necessary to focus on the limits of this expression 153 to determine to what extentif anythe courts can depart from it in insolvency cases through the anti-deprivation doctrine.…”

Section: The Normative Limits Of Freedom Of Contract and The Principl...mentioning

confidence: 99%

The normative and Jural meanings of the anti‐deprivation principle vis‐à‐vis freedom of contract

Vaccari

2022

Intl Insolvency Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contracts and clauses negotiated by the parties with the objective purpose of depriving the debtor of assets upon insolvency contravene the collective, mandatory nature of insolvency procedures and, consequently, the anti‐deprivation principle. This article provides a theoretical conceptualisation of the normative meaning of the anti‐deprivation principle by marking its separation from the principle of freedom of contract. If willingly and consistently applied by courts, this conceptualisation could provide enhanced predictability regarding the use of the anti‐deprivation principle in insolvency cases.

show abstract

Section: The Normative Limits Of Freedom Of Contract and The Principl...mentioning

confidence: 99%

The normative and Jural meanings of the anti‐deprivation principle vis‐à‐vis freedom of contract

Vaccari

2022

Intl Insolvency Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In that respect, it is necessary to promote financial education in society [Rutledge 2010]. Another reason is unawareness of rights and obligations [Ciacchi 2010].…”

Section: The System For Protecting Consumers Of Financial Servicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Customer as a Subject of Protection on the Financial Market in European Union

Cyman

2021

Financ. Law Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The crisis begun in 2007 exposed the weakness of the existing regulations, revealing challenges for legislators all over the world. Financial stability started to be understood as an essential value for the proper operation of the financial market. It has become important to address the question as to how to protect financial markets from more crises, or at least alleviate their effects. The idea of supervision of a financial market has undergone thorough transformation. Particular emphasis has been placed on protecting buyers of financial services. Adequate customer protection has been recognized as a sign of trust in the market and its stability and has gained systemic importance and relevance for the European financial system. There is a growing tendency to enlarge the group of subjects eligible for special protection. it is becoming an increasingly common idea that not only consumers but all non-professional customers should be protected. The idea is becoming widespread that the weaker party to a legal transaction can be not only a consumer [natural person] but also a non-professional market entity. Such a solution is certainly appropriate. Narrowing down the ‘consumer’ to a natural person may seem artificial and out of line with market realities, not to mention the serious consequences of bad financial decisions taken by non- professional financial market participants. Another important challenge facing the modern financial market is to establish a system of institutional safeguards to ensure security for all market entities and to enforce fair play rules. However, even the best provisions of substantive law, though necessary, may prove to fall short. Therefore, there is a pressing need for strong and competent both state and international institutions duly equipped with auditing and supervisory powers to deal with the present situation. They should also have the possibility of enforcing substantive laws in a way that allows for flexible responses to any emerging threat to the protected values. The shift towards a regulatory and supervisory method of protection sets a more serious tone for the supervision model adopted for the financial market. In it, the market is responsible not only for ensuring that the supervised entities operate correctly, but also for the quality of services that they provide.

show abstract

“Safety Net” Consumer Protection: Using Prohibitions on Unfair and Unconscionable Conduct to Respond to Predatory Business Models

Paterson

Brody²

2014

J Consum Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Freedom of contract as freedom from unconscionable contracts

Cited by 3 publications

References 10 publications

The normative and Jural meanings of the anti‐deprivation principle vis‐à‐vis freedom of contract

The normative and Jural meanings of the anti‐deprivation principle vis‐à‐vis freedom of contract

The Customer as a Subject of Protection on the Financial Market in European Union

“Safety Net” Consumer Protection: Using Prohibitions on Unfair and Unconscionable Conduct to Respond to Predatory Business Models

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About