LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Rahmatian, A. (2004)
Publisher: Edinburgh University Press
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects:
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • into the 21st Century. Essays in Honour of W A Wilson (1996) (henceforth Scots Law into the 21st
    • Century) 82; E Clive, “Current codification projects in Scotland” (2000) 4 EdinLR 341. 2 For a brief history of its codification see K Zweigert and H Kötz, An Introduction to Comparative Law,
    • 3rd edn (tr T Weir) (1998) (henceforth Zweigert and Kötz, Introduction) 157; H Schlosser, Grundzüge
    • der Neueren Privatrechtsgeschichte (1979) 67; F Wieacker, A History of Private Law in Europe (tr T
    • Weir) (1995) (henceforth Wieacker, History) 266; H Baltl, Österreichische Rechtsgeschichte, 3rd edn
    • (1977) 209. On Franz von Zeiller (1751-1828), the draftsman of the final drafts of what was to become
    • Forschungsband Franz von Zeiller (1980) 1. 3 J W Cairns, “Historical introduction”, in K G C Reid and R Zimmermann (eds), A History of Private Law
    • in Scotland (2000) (henceforth Reid and Zimmermann, History), vol 1, 176; D M Walker, The Scottish
    • Legal System, 8th edn (2001) (henceforth Walker, Scottish Legal System) 163, 180. 4 Compare §§ 7, 12, 16 ABGB. 5 See Wieacker, History, 159, 164 et seq. 6 Wieacker, History, 199 et seq, 240, 250. 7 Wieacker, History, 266, 268. 8 This brevity was, however, achieved at the expense of substantial gaps which had to be filled by case-law
    • and doctrine during the nineteenth century: compare Zweigert and Kötz, Introduction, 163. 9 Compare Zweigert and Kötz, Introduction, 163. 10 The ABGB consists of three parts: 1. law of persons; 2.1. law of property (possession, ownership, pledges,
    • servitudes, succession); 2.2. contracts, contracts concerning the matrimonial régime, damages; 3.
    • rights and obligations, time-bar and prescription). 11 Compare W Ogris, Die Rechtsentwicklung in Österreich 1848-1918 (1975) 58. 12 The ABGB also survived in most parts of what was to become Yugoslavia. 13 W Brauneder and H Lachmayer, Österreichische Verfassungsgeschichte, 3rd edn (1983) 249, 251. 14 The first large-scale amendments were made in the three “Partial Amendments” in 1914, 1915, 1916
    • to a substantial revision of the code as a whole. See Ogris, Die Rechtsentwicklung in Österreich, note 11
    • above, 69. 15 Compare ABGB, § 14, and §§ 15 et seq (persons); §§ 285 et seq (things); §§ 859 et seq (obligations). 16 Reform of the ABGB is nevertheless frequently discussed, see C Fischer-Czermak et al (eds), Das
    • ABGB auf dem Weg in das 3 Jahrtausend (2003). 17 See, e.g., H L MacQueen, “Scots Law and the road to the new ius commune” (2000) 4(4) Electronic
    • Journal of Comparative Law available at ; W D H Sellar, “Scots
    • law: mixed from the very beginning? A tale of two receptions” (2000) 4 EdinLR 3. 18 See Zweigert and Kötz Introduction, 204. Wieacker is much more cautious, History, 394: “It is perhaps
    • however, well before devolution). 19 H Lévy-Ullmann, “The law of Scotland” (1925) 37 JR 370 at 390. This enthusiasm is typical of the older
    • peaceful Europe after the world wars. 20 Including potential forced assimilation, e.g. ss 57 et seq (change of name) of the 1994 Quebec Civil Code
    • could be used for this purpose. 21 See especially P Legrand, “Against a European civil code” (1997) 60 MLR 44, 53 and note 54: “the 1994
    • political project”; and P Legrand, “Civil Law codification in Quebec: a case of decivilianization” (1993)
    • Zeitschrift für Europäisches Privatrecht 574, 583. 22 E Örücü, “Comparative law as a tool of construction in Scottish courts” 2000 JR 27, 33, 36. 23 Some authors do not view the influence of English law as particularly desirable, see e.g. Walker, Scottish
    • Legal System, 196. Others, however, stress the English law impact as very beneficial for the development
    • Victorian Britain”, (1992) 109 LQR 570, 572, 588. 24 R Evan-Jones, “Receptions of law, mixed legal systems and the myth of the genius of Scots private law”
    • (1998) 114 LQR 228, 232, 247-248. 25 See K G C Reid and R Zimmermann, “The development of legal doctrine in a mixed system”, in Reid
    • and Zimmermann, History, vol 1, 6. 26 On the drafting style of the Acts of the Scottish Parliament (then to come), see E Clive, “Law-making in
    • Scotland: from APS to ASP” (1999) 3 EdinLR 131. 27 Compare A E Anton, “Obstacles to codification” 1982 JR 15, 18, 21, 30, and below. 28 A much more exhaustive treatment (on which this section is based) can be found in W W McBryde, The
    • Law of Contract in Scotland, 2nd edn (2001) 351 et seq (henceforth McBryde, Contract); H L
    • MacQueen and J Thomson, Contract Law in Scotland (2000) (henceforth MacQueen and Thomson,
    • Contract) 154 et seq; W W McBryde, “Error”, in Reid and Zimmermann, History, vol 2, 72 et seq
    • (henceforth McBryde, Error); D M Walker, Principles of Scottish Private Law, 4th edn (1988), vol 2,
    • book 4 (Obligations), (henceforth Walker 2) 65 et seq. 29 Error in formation of a contract only is discussed, not error in performance, which is in the writer's view
    • McBryde, Contract, 379: condictio indebiti). 38 Accordingly, W M Gloag, The Law of Contract, 2nd edn (1929), discusses error and misrepresentation
    • separately, see 435, 457. See also below. 39 Ritchie v Glass 1936 SLT 591. See also J Thomson, “Error revised” 1992 SLT (News) 215. 40 Menzies v Menzies (1893) 20 R (HL) 108, 142 per Lord Watson. 41 Manners v Whitehead (1898) 1 F 171; McBryde, Contract, 360 with further case references, and 370. 42 Following Stair and Bell who use the term “error in substantials”. 43 That is, a false statement of fact which induces the other party to contract, e.g. Smith v Chadwick (1884)
    • 9 App Cas 187; Edgington v Fitzmaurice (1885) 29 Ch D 459. In the concept of misrepresentation, the
    • aspect of “error” on the part of the representee does not play a determining role. 44 McBryde, Contract, 372. 45 MacQueen and Thomson, Contract, 159. 46 Compare Germany: § 119 BGB; Austria: § 901 ABGB. Swiss law is less strict: see Art 24 (1) (4) OR, in
    • contrast with Art 24 (2) OR. French law indirectly also recognises the distinction between error in
    • transaction and error in motive: see the reference to “la cause principale de la convention” in Art 1110
    • Code civil and case-law. 47 Angus v Bryden 1992 SLT 884. 48 Compare A Ehrenzweig, System des österreichischen allgemeinen Privatrechts I/1, 2nd edn (1951) 226. 94 Compare McBryde, Contract, 363; R Black in The Laws of Scotland: Stair Memorial Encyclopaedia,
    • vol 15 (1996), para 692. 95 McBryde, Contract, 363. Walker 2, 70, cites mostly English cases. 96 McBryde, Error, 72: “After 500 years of development the law is in material parts uncertain and
    • conflicting.” 97 Zweigert and Kötz, Introduction, 411. 98 Esso Petroleum Co Ltd v Mardon [1976] QB 801. 99 That does not only apply to liability under Hedley Byrne v Heller [1964] AC 465, but also to damages
    • for negligent misstatement under the Misrepresentation Act 1967, s 2 (1): Royscott Trust Ltd v
    • Rogerson [1991] 3 All ER 294. 100 Derry v Peek (1889) 14 App Cas 337. 101 The claim under s 2 (1) is linked to the making of a contract, but still tortious in nature. 102 Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd [1964] AC 465. 103 McBryde, Contract, 372. 104 A short account in the English language can be found in Zweigert and Kötz, Introduction, 410-419. 115 See Appendix under “Austria”. 116 Karl Anton v Martini (1726-1800) in his Positiones de iure naturali (1762, 2nd edn 1780), especially in
    • § 451. 117 See G Wesener, “Zeillers Lehre 'von den Verträgen überhaupt'”, in W Selb and H Hofmeister (eds),
    • Forschungsband Franz von Zeiller (1980) 258-259. 118 OGH in SZ 46/84. 119 On this issue briefly, L Winkel, “Die Irrtumslehre”, in R Feenstra and R Zimmermann (eds), Das
    • römisch-holländische Recht, Fortschritte des Zivilrechts im 17 und 18 Jahrhundert (1992), 225, 230. 120 H Koziol and R Welser, Bürgerliches Recht I, 9th edn (1992) 128-129. 121 Zweigert and Kötz, Introduction, 414. 122 On constructive trusts in Scots law see G Gretton, “Constructive trusts”, parts I and II, (1997) 1
    • EdinLR 281 and 408, especially at 284, 288, 291 (relationship with unjustified enrichment). 123 This theory of abstract delivery goes back to F C von Savigny, System des heutigen römischen Rechts
    • (1840-49) vol 3, 312-313, (indirectly also) vol 4, 244-246, and can especially be found in Savigny, Das
    • Obligationenrecht als Theil des heutigen Römischen Rechts, vol 2 (1853) 254-261, in particular at 257
    • and note (m): see now § 929 BGB. See also Reid, Property, para 608; D L Carey Miller, “Systems of
    • Essays in Scots Law. A Tribute to Professor Sir Thomas Smith QC (1992) 13, 28. 124 E.g. in Austria, Switzerland, The Netherlands. 125 E.g. in Germany. 126 At least outside the realm of the Sale of Goods Act 1979: compare s 17. 127 Reid, Property, para. 609; Carey Miller, “Systems of Property”, note 123 above. 128 See, with regard to land, S Wortley, “Double sales and the offside trap: some thoughts on the rule
    • penalising private knowledge of a prior right” 2002 JR 291, 312. 134 Regulation for Bahrain (under a British Order in Council), passed 25 Feb 1961, based on the Indian
    • Contract Act 1872, published in W M Ballantyne, Commercial Law in the Arab Middle East (1986)
    • 279. Sections 15, 20, 21, and 23-25 are especially relevant. Unlike most other countries of the Arab
    • 4-6, 56. 135 Consolidation could perhaps be defined as a private arrangement of the legal material, e.g. by
    • codification” (2000) 4 EdinLR 350, 353. 136 Compare discussion of the terminology in W Dale (ed), British and French Statutory Drafting. The
    • Proceedings of the Franco-British Conference of 7 and 8 April 1986 (1987) 44, 72. 137 E.g. Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire [1992] 1 AC 310. 138 See also critical comment in P L Davies, Gower's Principles of Modern Company Law, 6th edn (1997) 62. 139 B Fauvarque-Cosson, “Modern developments in French codification” (2000) 4 EdinLR 350, 352;
    • Zweigert and Kötz, Introduction, 615. 140 Dale, British and French Statutory Drafting, note 136 above, 65. Good examples of concise provisions
    • (as regards the form, not always the content) are ss 29, 31 of the Bills of Exchange Act and ss 16, 17, 20
    • (but not s 18) of the Sale of Goods Act. 141 D M Walker, A Legal History of Scotland, vol 6 (2001) 872. 142 For example, the distinction between contract and conveyance in relation to transfer of ownership,
    • (which is made by Scots law) is unclear, s 18, rule 1, and there is effectively a causal theory of transfer,
    • unlike classical Scots law, ss 1 and 17. See also Reid, Property, paras 606, 610. 143 A G Chloros, “Principle, reason and policy in the development of European law” (1968) 17 ICLQ 849,
    • 862-863, advocates a Civilian drafting style (together with Civilian statutory interpretation) even for
    • the English law (of contract). 144 See, e.g., Montesquieu, De l'esprit des lois, livre XXIX, ch 16. 145 On the Austrian “Compilationscommission”, which started its work in 1753, see P H von Harrasowsky,
    • Geschichte der Codification des österreichischen Civilrechtes (1868) 38, 60 et seq, 97. 146 Wieacker, History, 261, 267; H Schlosser, Grundzüge der Neueren Privatrechtsgeschichte (1979) 54,
    • 67. 147 See R Cross et al, Statutory Interpretation, 2nd edn (1987) 47; Walker, Scottish Legal System, 413; N
    • Walker, “The crumbling pillars of statutory interpretation”, in MacQueen, Scots Law into the 21st
    • Century 126. 148 On statutory interpretation in France, which is largely similar, see e.g. M Troper et al, “Statutory
    • Comparative Study (1991) 171. 149 F Bydlinski, Juristische Methodenlehre und Rechtsbegriff, 2nd edn (1991) 437. See also K Larenz,
    • Methodenlehre der Rechtswissenschaft, 4th edn (1979) 307. 157 One of the well-known codification debates in history was in early nineteenth-century Germany
    • Deutschland (1814), who promoted codification, and F C v Savigny, Vom Beruf unserer Zeit für
    • Gesetzgebung und Rechtswissenschaft (1814, reprint 1892), who strongly opposed codification (see
    • especially at 13 et seq, 29 et seq, 59 et seq (against the then new ABGB), 94 et seq). 158 In favour of codification in Scotland: e.g. Clive, “A Scottish civil code”, note 1 above; Clive, “Current
    • codification projects in Scotland”, note 1 above; Walker, Scottish Legal System, 585, but see important
    • qualifications at 588; and on a more cautious note MacQueen, Scots law and the road to the new ius
    • commune, note 17 above. Against codification: e.g. A D M Forte, “If it ain't broke, don't fix it: on not
    • codifying commercial law”, in MacQueen, Scots Law into the 21st Century 92; A Rodger (now Lord
    • Rodger of Earlsferry), “The bells of law reform” 1993 SLT (News) 339, and note 173 below; Anton,
    • Obstacles to codification, note 27 above. 159 On the whole issue see Zweigert and Kötz, Introduction, chs 1 and 2. 160 The European Union, however, promotes the unification of private law of the Member States. See
    • States, OJ 1989 C158/400, and On the Harmonisation of Certain Sectors of Private Law of the
    • Member States, OJ 1994 C205/518. See also O Lando et al Principles of European Contract Law, parts
    • 1 and 2 (2000), part 3 (2003) (information on Lando Commission at
    • within European private law (information at ). 161 Legrand, “Against a European civil code”, note 21 above. See also Zweigert and Kötz, Introduction,
    • 24-25, 28. 162 See e.g. K Riedl, “The work of the Lando Commission from an alternative viewpoint” 2000 ERPL 71.
    • For strong reservations see P Legrand, “European Systems are not converging” (1996) 45 ICLQ 52, 61. 163 The Principles of European Contract Law, note 160 above, may be a starting point for codification on
    • a national level. 164 And therefore one should not be surprised to find broadly similar contract law principles in juris-
    • Islamic law: see J Schacht, An Introduction to Islamic Law (1964) 144-150. 165 See concerns expressed regarding the benefit of legal unification for the common market of the EU in
    • University of Trier, 2002, no 11 of Rechtspolitisches Forum), available at
    • trier.de/11_Kronke.pdf> . 166 See e.g. Legrand, “Against a European civil code”, note 21 above, 51; A Pinna, “Drafting a civil code for
    • Europe” Tilburg Foreign Law Review Journal on Foreign and Comparative Law (2002) 9(4), para
    • 1.1.1. 167 A good discussion of the advantages and problems of codification from a Common Law (English)
    • perspective can be found in M Clarke, “Doubts from the dark side - the case against codes” (2001) JBL
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article