Addressing the inadequacies of private law in the regulation of contracts – during and post contract formation periods

Ojo, Marianne (2011): Addressing the inadequacies of private law in the regulation of contracts – during and post contract formation periods.

Abstract

It has been argued that weaknesses inherent in Private Law rules, which contribute to its inability to effectively regulate contracts, are in part, attributed to its generality as well as inflexibility in adapting to individual situations. Whilst self-regulation, a constituent of the standard setting system which private law supplements, offers advantages which include proximity (in that self regulatory organisations are considered closer to the industry being regulated), flexibility, and a high level of compliance with rules, it will be highlighted in this paper that some other models of regulation, are capable of conferring greater flexibility, compliance, enforcement and accountability.

The setting of standards with „an adequate degree of specificity in order to provide effective guidance, as well as the lack of expertise in choosing between standards are amongst some of the challenges which the Private Law of Contract is confronted with.

This paper aims to highlight and demonstrate why an interaction with public regulation, as well as an incorporation of substantive equality principles, will be required to address these weaknesses of Private Law. Further, it illustrates how through the evolvement of self regulation, and the interaction of self regulation with public regulation, Private Law has also evolved in its interaction with public regulation.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: regulation; implied contracts; Equity; undue influence; economic duress; bargaining power; self regulation; accountability; legal certainty
• Subjects: K - Law and Economics > K2 - Regulation and Business Law; G - Financial Economics > G3 - Corporate Finance and Governance; D - Microeconomics > D8 - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty; G - Financial Economics > G2 - Financial Institutions and Services > G28 - Government Policy and Regulation

References

Ayres I and J Braithwaite, Responsive Regulation: Transcending the Deregulation Debate Oxford University Press

Barnard C, „The Changing Scope of the Fundamental Principle of Equality „ (2001) 46 McGill LJ. 955

Barnard C and Hepple B, „Substantive Equality“ The Cambridge Law Journal (2000), 59: 562-585.

Bigwood R, Exploitative Contracts (2003) Oxford University Press

Collins H, Regulating Contracts (1999) Oxford University Press

Elliot M, Cambridge Law Journal, 69(1), March 2010, and CASE AND COMMENT THE GOVERNMENT VERSUS THE OMBUDSMAN: WHAT ROLE FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW?

Grabosky P and J Braithwaite Of Manners Gentle: Enforcement Strategies of Australian Business Regulatory Agencies, (1986)

Jansen N and Zimmerman R, “A EUROPEAN CIVIL CODE IN ALL BUT NAME”: DISCUSSING THE NATURE AND PURPOSES OF THE DRAFT COMMON FRAME OF REFERENCE Cambridge Law Journal, 69(1), March 2010

Hickman TR, „The Reasonableness Principle: Reassessing its Place in the Public Sphere“ Cambridge Law Journal 14 April 2004 Volume 63 Issue 01 at pages 166-198

Hughes K, Case and Comment ACCOUNTANTS ARE NOT LAWYERS: LEGAL PROFESSIONAL PRIVILEGE, ACCOUNTANTS AND THE TAX MAN The Cambridge Law Journal (2011) Volume 70 Issue 1 19-21

R. (Bradley) v. Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2008] EWCA Civ 36, [2009] Q.B. 114

R. Equitable Members Action Group) v. HM Treasury [2009] EWHC 2495 (Admin)

Ojo M, „Integrity, Respect for Others, and Ethics – Three Essential Leadership Qualities (April 2011)

Ojo M, Co-operative and Competitive Enforced Self Regulation: The Role of Governments, Private Actors and Banks in Corporate Responsibility (May 2010)

Ojo M, Building on the Trust of Management: Overcoming the Paradoxes of Principles Based Regulation Law and Pro sociality e Journals and Banking & Financial Services Policy Report, Vol. 30, No. 7, Aspen Publishers/ Wolters Kluwer Law and Business, July 2011