Publication Type

Journal Article

Publication Date

7-2010

Abstract

Differences between contract laws of Member States are often said to impose costs on and deter cross-border trade, and in order to increase cross-border trade, these contract laws ought to be harmonized. This article promises a paradigm shift in considering whether there is a need for harmonization; and if so, what form it ought to take. A behavioural approach is adopted to answer two underlying questions: how do actors think about these differences when they decide to contract? How does the form of harmonization influence such decisions? Insights from disciplines like cognitive and social psychology are identified and applied to find out how actors think and what motivates them to make the decisions they do. Psychology reveals that most actors do not think about differences between contract laws, a point which questions the need for harmonization. Furthermore, most actors prefer the status quo, strongly suggesting that harmonization by way of optional rules may not achieve the desired result.

Keywords

cross-border trade, European contract law, harmonization, behavioural economics, psychology

Discipline

Contracts | Law and Economics | Social Welfare Law

Research Areas

Asian and Comparative Legal Systems

Publication

European Review of Private Law

Volume

38

Issue

2

First Page

285

Last Page

305

ISSN

0928-9801

Publisher

Kluwer Law International

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.

Additional URL

https://ssrn.com/abstract=1456327

Share

COinS