Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m42fx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T17:11:34.568Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

3 - Does the use of common law contract models give rise to a tacit choice of law or to a harmonised, transnational interpretation?

from PART 2 - Methodological challenges

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 April 2011

Giuditta Cordero-Moss
Affiliation:
University of Oslo
Giuditta Cordero-Moss
Affiliation:
Universitetet i Oslo
Get access

Summary

Before turning to how the various national laws may affect the interpretation and application of an international contract (which will be the subject of Part 3 of this book), some methodological questions must be addressed. Should an international contract be governed by a national law different from the one that inspired its drafting? Should an international contract be governed by a national law at all? Rather, should not an international contract be subject to a harmonised, transnational law? The thesis of this chapter is that the applicable law should be chosen according to the general conflict rules, even though this would lead to a situation where the contract is governed by a law different from the law that inspired it. Furthermore, the contract is ultimately subject to a state law, even though the underlying transaction is international. These two aspects are dealt with separately in Sections 1 and 2 below.

Does the drafting style imply a choice of the applicable law?

The first question regards the choice of the applicable law. An international contract is potentially governed by the laws of at least two different countries, those with which the legal relationship has a connection: these could be the countries where the parties have their respective place of business, the country where the contract is to be performed or other countries with which the contract had other connections.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Magnus, U., Staudingers Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch mit Einführungsgesetz und Nebegesetzen, Einleitung zu Art 27ff EGBGB, Article 27–33 EGBGB, etc. (Sellier, 2002)Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×