Autonomy for Contract, Refined

被引:7
作者
Dagan, Hanoch [1 ,2 ]
Heller, Michael
机构
[1] Tel Aviv Univ, Legal Theory & Innovat, Tel Aviv, Israel
[2] Tel Aviv Univ, Edmond J Safra Ctr Eth, Tel Aviv, Israel
关键词
D O I
10.1007/s10982-021-09404-y
中图分类号
B82 [伦理学(道德学)];
学科分类号
摘要
In 'The Choice Theory of Contracts', we advance a claim about the centrality of autonomy to contract. Since publishing Choice Theory, we have engaged dozens of reviews and responses; here, we reply to Robert Stevens, Arthur Ripstein, and Brian Bix. All this rigorous debate confirms for us one core point: contract's ultimate value must be autonomy, properly understood and refined. Autonomy is the telos of contract and its grounding principle. In Choice Theory, we stressed the (1) proactive facilitation component of autonomy, in particular, the state's obligation regarding contract types. Here, we highlight two additional, necessary implications of autonomy for contract: (2) regard for future selves and (3) relational justice. These three aspects of autonomy shape the range, limit, and floor, respectively, for the legitimate use of contract. They provide a principled and constrained path for law reform.
引用
收藏
页码:213 / 245
页数:33
相关论文
共 49 条
  • [41] Ripstein Arthur, 2017, JERUSALEM REV LEGAL, V14, P64
  • [42] THIRD-PARTY BENEFICIARIES AND CONTRACTUAL NETWORKS
    Schwartz, Alan
    Scott, Robert E.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF LEGAL ANALYSIS, 2015, 7 (02): : 325 - 361
  • [43] SCOTT ROBERT E., 2013, CONTRACT LAW THEORY, P255
  • [44] Shiffrin SV, 2007, HARVARD LAW REV, V120, P708
  • [45] Stevens Robert, 2017, JER REV LEG STUD C C
  • [46] Szladits Charles, 1955, AM. J. COMP. L., V4, P226
  • [47] Szladits Charles, 1955, AM. J. COMPAR. L., V4, P208
  • [48] WEINRIB ERNEST J., 2012, CORRECTIVE JUSTICE, P153
  • [49] Should the Payee Pay?
    Wilmot-Smith, Frederick
    [J]. OXFORD JOURNAL OF LEGAL STUDIES, 2017, 37 (04) : 844 - 861