On Comparing French and English Contract Law: Insights from Social Contract Theory

Valcke, Catherine

doi:10.2139/ssrn.1328923

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Rather than tinker with labels, it might be more straightforward to point to some recent works that would certainly count as comparative jurisprudence, as it was originally conceived. In private law, James Gordley's investigations of the intellectual foundations of tort and contract (Gordley [1993] and [2007]) or various articles by Catherine Valcke (Valcke [2009]) are plainly in a different mould than the older private-law doctrinalism. In legal history, virtually anything by James Whitman (Whitman [2005]) is a fine illustration of how to use legal history to investigate current divergences among legal systems.…”

Section: Loose Ends and Misunderstandingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Jurisprudence

Ewald¹

2023

Elgar Encyclopedia of Comparative Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comparative Jurisprudence'Comparative Jurisprudence' started off as a complicated, ambitious and at times confusing attempt by William Ewald, in the 1990s, to rethink the foundations of comparative law (→ Legal Theory and Comparative Law). The principal ideas were presented in his monograph-length article, 'What Was It Like to Try a Rat?' (Ewald [1995a]), and in a couple of shorter pieces that explored various subsidiary aspects (Ewald [1995b]; Ewald [1998]). It is now recognized to be an analytically robust account of comparative law as an academic discipline in its own right, focused not so much on the text or even context of legal rules, as on the reasoning structures underlying them.The argument of 'Rats' is complex and occasionally hard to follow and it may clarify matters to observe that the article was the product of a long development and represents more than a single project. The initial motivation, pursued in Oxford and Göttingen in the 1980s, was entirely within the philosophy of law. Ewald was at the time on the philosophy faculty at Oxford, had studied closely the jurisprudential writings of HLA Hart and Ronald Dworkin, and was searching for a way to extend their theories. His idea was to look more closely at two interrelated matters that, in those days, were not much discussed in Oxford: first, the history of legal philosophy and, secondly, the contributions of thinkers outside the Anglophone world. There was an additional motivation. The EEC (not yet the European Union) was clearly a legal project of great significance, and he supposed it would be of philosophical interest to examine the arguments that had been made during the legal unification of Germany and Italy in the nineteenth century. One debate in particular seemed of great significance: the disagreement, at the end of the eighteenth century, between Immanuel Kant and his student Johan Gottfried Herder. Their debate was essentially over questions of nationality and morality and cultural relativism. The contemporary relevance of their debate seemed obvious.

show abstract

Section: Loose Ends and Misunderstandingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Jurisprudence

Ewald¹

2023

Elgar Encyclopedia of Comparative Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Primeiro, as obras dos comparatistas sobre o direito dos contratos continuam a sofrer do "mal-estar" renitente que assola o direito comparado como disciplina em geral, no qual a maioria das obras descrevem diferenças observadas, mas não as explica (VALCKE, 2009). Segundo, diferentemente de outras áreas de investigação comparativa, ainda há uma escassez de estudos que procuram entender a relação da natureza do direito e enforcement contratual, em um dado país, com outras estruturas políticas e econômicas.…”

Section: Conclusãounclassified

O direito contratual comparado em nova perspectiva: revisitando as diferenças entre os sistemas romano-germânico e de common law

Pargendler

2017

Rev. direito GV

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ResumoEste artigo busca oferecer uma nova interpretação de certas distinções clássicas entre o direito dos contratos romano-germânico e anglo-saxônico. Desta análise surge um padrão claro, mas até então negligenciado. O sistema de civil law impõe mais limitações ao conteúdo das obrigações contratuais, valorizando o papel da boa-fé como standard de conduta obrigatório e impondo um maior número de cláusulas de natureza cogente. O sistema de common law, em contrapartida, estabelece limitações mais contundentes aos remédios disponíveis em caso de inadimplemento contratual, invalidando cláusulas penais, qualificando a execução específica como remédio excepcional e concedendo mais generosamente um "novo começo" (fresh start) na insolvência. Não obstante, os diferentes papéis do Estado na fiscalização das cláusulas do contrato e na imposição de consequências jurídicas para o inadimplemento são, em larga medida, substitutos funcionais, o que torna os resultados concretamente obtidos em ambos os sistemas mais próximos do que se esperaria ao se examinar os diferentes institutos de forma isolada. Palavras-chaveDireito contratual; direito comparado; tradição romano-germânica; common law; método funcional. Abstract This article seeks to offer a novel interpretation of certain classical differences between the civil and the common law of contracts. This analysis reveals a clear

show abstract

A conversation with Lord Hoffmann

Gibbons¹

2010

Law and Financial Markets Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On Comparing French and English Contract Law: Insights from Social Contract Theory

Cited by 5 publications

References 7 publications

Comparative Jurisprudence

Comparative Jurisprudence

O direito contratual comparado em nova perspectiva: revisitando as diferenças entre os sistemas romano-germânico e de common law

A conversation with Lord Hoffmann

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About