About the Book
As cross-border transactions expand in our contemporary global economy, the significance of comparative contract law is evermore apparent. In addition the role of lawyers in transactional counselling as well as dispute resolution has become increasingly prominent. Appreciation of the principal similarities and differences between the two major subdivisions of Common Law - the United States and the British Commonwealth - and Civil Law - French versus German law - has thus become imperative. This research review endeavours to facilitate such appreciation and will prove an essential reference point for students, researchers and policymakers.
Table of Contents:
Contents:
Introduction John O. Haley
PART I Overview
1. E. Allan Farnsworth (2006), ‘Comparative Contract Law’, in Mathias Reimann and Reinhard Zimmerman (eds), Oxford Handbook of Comparative Law, Chapter 28, London, UK and New York, NY, USA: Oxford University Press, 899–935
PART II The nineteenth century development of contemporary contract law
2. A.W.B. Simpson (1975), ‘Innovation in Nineteenth Century Contract Law’, Law Quarterly Review, 91 (2), April, 247–78
3. P. S. Atiyah (1978), ‘Contracts, Promises and the Law of Obligations’, Law Quarterly Review, 94, April, 193–223
4. Roscoe Pound (1938), ‘The Influence of the Civil Law in America’, Louisiana Law Review, 1 (1), November, 1–16
PART III french and german contract law and their influence
A. French Contract Law
5. Roscoe Pound (1955), ‘The French Civil Code and the Spirit of Nineteenth Century Law’, Boston University Law Review, 35, 77–97
6. Arthur von Mehren (1955), ‘The French Civil Code and Contract: A Comparative Analysis of Formation and Form’, Louisiana Law Review, XV, 687–711
B. German Contract Law
7. Manfred Pieck (1996), ‘A Study of the Significant Aspects of German Contract Law’, Annual Survey of International and Comparative Law, 3 (1), 111–76
8. Friedrich Kessler (1975), ‘Some Thoughts on the Evolution of the German Law of Contracts – A Comparative Study: Part 1’, UCLA Law Review, 22, 1066–82
9. Manfred Löwisch (2003), ‘New Law of Obligations in Germany’, Ritsumeikan Law Review, 20 (4), 141–56
C. German Legal Science and its Reception
10. Zentaro Kitagawa (1970), ‘Theory Reception – One Aspect of the Development of Japanese Civil Law Science’, Law in Japan: An Annual, 4, 1–16
D. European Contract Law in a Socialist System
11. William Jones (1989), ‘Sources of Chinese Obligation Law’ Law and Contemporary Problems, 52 (3), Summer, 69–99
12. Jing Leng and Wei Shen (2017), 'The Evolution of Contract Law in China: Convergence in Law But Divergence in Enforcement?', in Yui-chien Chung, Wei Shen and Wen-yeu Wang (eds), Private Law in China and Taiwan – Legal and Economic Analyses, Chapter 3, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 63–99
PART IV CONTRACTING WITHOUT LAW
13. Stewart Macaulay (1963), ‘Non-Contractural Relations in Business: A Preliminary Study’, American Sociological Review, 28 (1), February, 55–67
14. Takeyoshi Kawashima (1974), ‘The Legal Consciouness of Contract in Japan’, Law in Japan: An Annual, 7, 1–21
PART V Pre- contractural obligation
15. E. Allan Farnsworth (1987), ‘Precontractural Liability and Preliminary Agreements: Fair Dealing and Failed Negotiations’, Columbia Law Review, 87 (2), March, 217–94
16. Reiner Schulze (2005), ‘Precontractural Duties and Conclusion of Contract in European Law’, European Review of Private Law, 6, 841–66 ]
17. Shoji Kawakami (1990), ‘Japan’, in Ewoud H. Hondius (ed.) Precontractural Liability: Reports to the XIIIth Congress International Academy of Comparative Law, Montreal, Canada, 18-24 August 1990, Chapter 13, Deventer, The Netherlands: Kluwer Law and Taxation Publishers, 205, 207–21
PART VI GOOD FAITH
18. Friedrich Kessler and Edith Fine (1964), ‘Culpha in Contrahendo, Bargaining in Good Faith, and Freedom of Contract: A Comparative Study’ Harvard Law Review, 77 (3), January, 401–49
19. Grant Gilmore (1954), ‘The Commercial Doctrine of Good Faith Purchase’, Yale Law Journal, 63 (8), June, 1057–122
PART VII STANDARD FORM CONTRACTS
20. Frederich Kessler (1943), ‘Contracts of Adhesion - Some Thoughts about Freedom of Contract’, Columbia Law Review, 43 (5), July, 629–42
PART VIII DISTINCTIVE FEATURES OF COMMON LAW CONTRACTS
A. Consideration
21. Ernest G. Lorenzen (1919), ‘Causa and Consideration in the Law of Contracts, Yale Law Journal, XXVIII (7), May, 621–46
22. Melvin Aron Eisenberg (1982), ‘The Principles of Consideration’, Cornell Law Review, 67 (4), April, 640–65
B. Promissory Estoppel
23. Stanley D. Henderson (1969), ‘Promissory Estoppel and Traditional Contract Doctrine’, Yale Law Journal, 78 (3), January, 343–87
C. The Parole Evidence Rule
24. Arthur L. Corbin (1944), ‘The Parole Evidence Rule’, Yale Law Journal, 53 (4), September, 603–63
D. Conditions
25. Arthur L. Corbin (1919), ‘Conditions in the Law of Contract’, Yale Law Journal, 28 (8), June, 739–68
PART IX IMPOSSIBILTY AND CHANGED CONTRACTS
26. James Gordley (2004), ‘Impossibility and Changed and Unforeseen Circumstances’, American Journal of Comparative Law, 52 (3), Summer, 513–30
PART X Nonperformance and remedies
27. Zentaro Kitagawa (1969), ‘Damages in Contracts for the Sale of Goods’, Law in Japan: An Annual, 3, 43–89
28. Henrik Lando and Caspar Rose (2004), ‘On the Enforcement of Specific Performance in Civil Law Countries’, International Review of Law and Economics, 24 (4), December, 473–87
29. Avery W. Katz (2005), ‘Remedies for Breach of Contract under the CISG’, International Review of Law and Economics, 25 (3), September, 378–96
Index
About the Author :
Edited by John O. Haley, William R. Orthwein Distinguished Professor of Law Emeritus, Washington University in St. Louis, US
Review :
‘This superb collection includes both classic scholarship on the common law and civil law of contract and recent scholarship that bring the coverage up to the present, including the reception of civil law in China and Japan. Professor Haley has wisely selected essays that illuminate the distinctive features of the common law of contracts and U.S. contract law.’
