Classic Contract Law

1669 Words7 Pages
What principles governed ‘classical contract law’? To what extent are they still relevant to modern contract law? It is stated that the contracts, before the nineteenth century, was a part of property law which concerns the transfer of title for particular items from someone to another. That is to say, “the process by which ‘my horse’ became your horse.” Due to the validity of the title theory at that time, legal enforcement of the executory agreement was not generally possible. In order to clarify, executory agreements refers unperformed agreement such as long term or relational contract (for example; franchise or employment contract), whereas, executed agreements refers performed agreements such as one-off or discrete contracts (for example; typical sale contract). In addition, laypersons in the juries, basically, apply the community standards of justice, thus the substantive fairness was in agenda. It is suggested that before the emergence of the classical contract law the sources of the contractual obligations were not only or even mainly the agreements, but the sources were the moral standards of the community. As the judge De Grey JC put forward in Flureau v Thornhill ‘I think the verdict wrong in point of law. On a contract for a purchase, if the title proves bad and the vendor is (without fraud) incapable of a good one, I do not think that the purchaser can be entitled to any damages for the fancied goodness of the bargain which he supposes he has lost “ We would even go so far to say that the eighteenth century contract law was subordinate to the property law. However, as the time passed, the conjecture has changed and classical contract law has arisen due to the new developments. First of all, it is necessary to point out two distinctive approaches as regards with the roots of the principles of classical contract law. On the one hand there
Open Document