Independent Publishers Group Logo

Sign up today...
for featured pop culture and science reads, books for kids and teens,special offers, bestsellers, and more, in your inbox!

Select topics of interest:
Dispute Avoidance and European Contract Law
Dispute Avoidance and European Contract Law

Dispute Avoidance and European Contract Law

Dealing with Divergence

European Studies in Private Law


259 Pages, 6.5 x 9.5

Formats: Trade Paper

Trade Paper, $98.00 (US $98.00)

Publication Date: February 2008

ISBN 9789076871905

Rights: US & CA

Europa Law Publishing (Feb 2008)

Price: $98.00


Since early 2000, European institutions have politically prioritized the need for greater coherence and uniformity in European private law. Contract law, in particular, has remained center stage. Concerns - that the functioning of the Community's internal market has been hampered by divergence in Member States' national contract rules, and that both business and consumers are dissuaded from contracting cross-border - have prompted a series of landmark Communications and an Action Plan. Most recently, there has been full institutional support for the delivery of a decidedly cryptic 'Common Frame of Reference,' comprised of general principles, model rules, and uniform legal terminology. Despite a lack of convincing empirical data in support of the convergence thesis, a diminished business interest has in part allowed the proponents of a comprehensive codification of private law to set the political and academic agenda. Yet this clamor for codification has in many respects overlooked the mechanics of commercial contracting in particular, the importance of contract drafting, and the complex negotiations that lead to deals both domestically and cross border. This book therefore engages with two 'holy grails' of modern contract scholarship - the appropriate design of EC contract rules and judicial treatment of preliminary incomplete bargains. In so doing, the study reveals the weakness of existing soft law initiatives and framework codes in capturing the degree of specificity and complexity in the field. Instead, the case is made for a viable methodology of dispute avoidance aimed at re-conceptualizing and re-orientating the harmonization effort.