During the later half of the 20th century standard form contracts began to be used more frequently in contract situations. This trend has been consistent and in today’s world numerous commercial parties employ such contracts in their business transactions. The reasons for the extended use of standard form contracts are the benefits that can be obtained for the parties such as time efficiency, effectiveness and price advantages. Standardised contracts often regulate certain issues of the contract for example the way of delivery, remedies and complaints. The definition of such contracts is corresponding in Sweden and England as contracts containing in advance standardised terms with an aim to be used similarly in contract situations with most clients or customers. As the usage of standard form contracts increased, the number of unfair contract terms also enhanced. Therefore, the legislative powers in Sweden and England realised that the rules concerning the freedom of contract had to be restricted and governed. As a result, the legislative powers introduced an open control device through statutory control. This was done in Sweden in 1976 with the enforcement of Section 36 of the Contracts Act, and in England the year after when UCTA came into force. The statutory control in both Sweden and England makes it possible to appraise the fairness of exemption clauses. The statutory control is not identical in the two states. UCTA only concerns exclusion clauses and limitation clauses regarding contract terms and non-contractual notices. In Sweden, on the other hand, there is a general doctrine of unfairness and Section 36 of the Contracts Act can set aside all kinds of agreements. The statutory control is complemented by indirect means of controlling the content of a contract through non statutory methods. The non statutory methods are concerned with the incorporation, interpretation and construction of clauses in a contract. To be valid and for a party to be able to rely on a term it must have been incorporated into the contract. The rules concerning the interpretation of standard form contracts and exclusion clauses are also of great importance. In both states the approach held is that the statutory control should be used preferably over the indirect control means, though the indirect means still has a prominent role in England through common law. Both England and Sweden agree on that the weaker party in a contract situation is in a greater need of protection by the rules of law in unfair contract situations. However unfairness can only arise if the superior party has wrongfully used the exclusion clause. Our study shows the differences between Swedish and English contract law that can result in difficulties in the harmonisation process. These differences concern the test of reasonableness of exemption clauses, the doctrine of good faith, the legal effects and to what extent the indirect means of control should be applied. The Swedish test of reasonableness may include all relevant circumstances irrespective of the time of their occurrence, before or after the entry of the contract. The courts in England are limited to circumstances that have occurred before the closure of the contract. Section 36 of the Swedish Contracts Act includes a general rule of unfairness applicable to all kinds of contract terms. The rule of unfairness in the UCTA on the other hand, is only applicable to exemption clauses and indemnity clauses and there is no general rule of unfairness in English contract law. Instead the courts rely on indirect means of control, which therefore is of greater importance in English contract law. Finally, adjustments of unfair exemption clauses has a significant role in Swedish contract law, in contrast to English contract law where any adjustment is regarded as an intrusion of the freedom of contract. To endorse one of the most important aims of the EU; a well working inner market, discussions commenced in 2001. The discussions concerned the harmonisation of the contract law within the union. The questions that arose were whether or not it was possible at all to form a European common contract law and if so, what the effects would be. An action plan was developed by the Commission and today both the EU Parliament and the Council are positive in regard to the continuing work with a reference frame. The Commission aims to pass the reference frame in 2009. Since the EU member states are diverse and have different legal systems a harmonisation of the contract law could cause difficulties. There are differences concerning legal traditions and legal values, hence the legal expertise in Europe is divided in the harmonisation question. The following study aims to analyse the existing rules of law in Sweden and England representing two diverse legal systems existing in Europe; civil law and common law. The focus of this study regards the control of exclusion clauses in standard form contracts in both legal systems. The comparison will then be used to analyse the fundamental question if the harmonisation of contract law in the EU is feasible. Specific areas within the contract law have already been harmonised, which shows a possibility to coordinate common law and civil law. Directive 93/13/EEC on Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts is one example of harmonised contract law in the EU and the principles in PECL is another example which shows that it is possible to coordinate common law and civil law. A harmonisation of the contract law will probably promote the commerce within the union and be the next step towards one of the most prominent goals of the EU, namely a well functioning common market. However, our study shows that the differences between national legislation and the differences between the legal traditions within the EU are not insignificant and a harmonisation will probably not be enforced without difficulties.

<p>During the later half of the 20th century standard form contracts began to be used more frequently in contract situations. This trend has been consistent and in today’s world numerous commercial parties employ such contracts in their business transactions. The reasons for the extended use of standard form contracts are the benefits that can be obtained for the parties such as time efficiency, effectiveness and price advantages. Standardised contracts often regulate certain issues of the contract for example the way of delivery, remedies and complaints. The definition of such contracts is corresponding in Sweden and England as contracts containing in advance standardised terms with an aim to be used similarly in contract situations with most clients or customers.</p><p>As the usage of standard form contracts increased, the number of unfair contract terms also enhanced. Therefore, the legislative powers in Sweden and England realised that the rules concerning the freedom of contract had to be restricted and governed. As a result, the legislative powers introduced an open control device through statutory control. This was done in Sweden in 1976 with the enforcement of Section 36 of the Contracts Act, and in England the year after when UCTA came into force. The statutory control in both Sweden and England makes it possible to appraise the fairness of exemption clauses. The statutory control is not identical in the two states. UCTA only concerns exclusion clauses and limitation clauses regarding contract terms and non-contractual notices. In Sweden, on the other hand, there is a general doctrine of unfairness and Section 36 of the Contracts Act can set aside all kinds of agreements.</p><p>The statutory control is complemented by indirect means of controlling the content of a contract through non statutory methods. The non statutory methods are concerned with the incorporation, interpretation and construction of clauses in a contract. To be valid and for a party to be able to rely on a term it must have been incorporated into the contract. The rules concerning the interpretation of standard form contracts and exclusion clauses are also of great importance. In both states the approach held is that the statutory control should be used preferably over the indirect control means, though the indirect means still has a prominent role in England through common law. Both England and Sweden agree on that the weaker party in a contract situation is in a greater need of protection by the rules of law in unfair contract situations. However unfairness can only arise if the superior party has wrongfully used the exclusion clause.</p><p>Our study shows the differences between Swedish and English contract law that can result in difficulties in the harmonisation process. These differences concern the test of reasonableness of exemption clauses, the doctrine of good faith, the legal effects and to what extent the indirect means of control should be applied. The Swedish test of reasonableness may include all relevant circumstances irrespective of the time of their occurrence, before or after the entry of the contract. The courts in England are limited to circumstances that have occurred before the closure of the contract. Section 36 of the Swedish Contracts Act includes a general rule of unfairness applicable to all kinds of contract terms. The rule of unfairness in the UCTA on the other hand, is only applicable to exemption clauses and indemnity clauses and there is no general rule of unfairness in English contract law. Instead the courts rely on indirect means of control, which therefore is of greater importance in English contract law. Finally, adjustments of unfair exemption clauses has a significant role in Swedish contract law, in contrast to English contract law where any adjustment is regarded as an intrusion of the freedom of contract.</p><p>To endorse one of the most important aims of the EU; a well working inner market, discussions commenced in 2001. The discussions concerned the harmonisation of the contract law within the union. The questions that arose were whether or not it was possible at all to form a European common contract law and if so, what the effects would be. An action plan was developed by the Commission and today both the EU Parliament and the Council are positive in regard to the continuing work with a reference frame. The Commission aims to pass the reference frame in 2009. Since the EU member states are diverse and have different legal systems a harmonisation of the contract law could cause difficulties. There are differences concerning legal traditions and legal values, hence the legal expertise in Europe is divided in the harmonisation question.</p><p>The following study aims to analyse the existing rules of law in Sweden and England representing two diverse legal systems existing in Europe; civil law and common law. The focus of this study regards the control of exclusion clauses in standard form contracts in both legal systems. The comparison will then be used to analyse the fundamental question if the harmonisation of contract law in the EU is feasible. Specific areas within the contract law have already been harmonised, which shows a possibility to coordinate common law and civil law. Directive 93/13/EEC on Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts is one example of harmonised contract law in the EU and the principles in PECL is another example which shows that it is possible to coordinate common law and civil law. A harmonisation of the contract law will probably promote the commerce within the union and be the next step towards one of the most prominent goals of the EU, namely a well functioning common market. However, our study shows that the differences between national legislation and the differences between the legal traditions within the EU are not insignificant and a harmonisation will probably not be enforced without difficulties.</p>

The development of the United Nation’s Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) started at the beginning of the 20th century in order to provide a uniform legal regime for international sales contracts. The development started because of a belief that a uniform international sales convention would contribute certainty in commercial trade and decrease transaction costs for the contracting parties. The Convention was signed in Vienna 1980 and came into force in 1988 after securing the necessary number of ratifications. The CISG is automatically applied to international sale contracts in certain given situations but the contracting parties are free to exclude the Convention as applicable law in favour of another regulation. As of today, more than 25 years after the CISG came into force, the Convention is commonly being excluded as the governing law of international sales contracts. By studying surveys and academic writings, certain factors can be derived as reasons prior to an exclusion of the CISG. The factors can be referred to as unfamiliarity, time and costs, negotiation strength and standard form contracts or standard terms. Regarding unfamiliarity, the importance given to the Convention in law faculties within the signatory states, together with time and costs attributed to a familiarization process, seems to play an important role. Moreover, the Convention is associated with problems regarding a non-uniform interpretation of the Convention’s provisions within the national courts and arbitral tribunals, as well as regarding its incompleteness, meaning that there are gaps that need to be filled by national law. These problems affect the Convention’s ability to provide potential users with legal certainty and predictability, which in turn may affect the familiarity with the Convention and hence have an impact on an exclusion of the CISG.

La problématique conduit à une analyse du droit européen privé des contrats. La première partie recherche les sources de la liberté contractuelle européenne. La multiplicité des règles et des pratiques permet de constater un défaut de définition. Le premier chapitre souligne que l'autonomie de la volonté est relative parce qu’elle est subjective et évolue au gré des équilibres en jeu. Il s'agit d'une liberté intégrée, issue du code civil romano-germanique. Le second chapitre permet de constater que l'autonomie de la volonté est un principe très relatif en droit international privé. Le pluralisme du droit implique que la liberté contractuelle est une notion sans source et ni stable, ni établie. Le droit international privé européen est en construction et fonctionnel.La seconde partie étudie la liberté contractuelle européenne du point de vue du droit positif au sens large du terme. Cette liberté est un principe relatif en symbiose avec les nécessités de protection des cocontractants et du commerce européen. Il s’agit d'un principe subjectif du fait de l'ordre public européen (qui contient l’ordre public économique, les lois de police et l’ordre public international classique), et d’un principe essentiel dans la construction européenne. Le premier chapitre trace le cadre et la structure générale de la liberté contractuelle européenne. Elle participe au commerce et se doit de respecter les principes essentiels de l’Union au sens de droit objectif (liberté d’établissement, juste concurrence, égalité commerciale) ; elle est traduite par l’essor de principes européens et par la pratique commerciale. Le second chapitre note que la liberté est une notion intégrée dans la société européenne. Elle est fonctionnelle et trouve son équilibre en correspondant avec l’ordre public au sens subjectif (protection des parties les plus faibles et des droits fondamentaux). / Problem drives to analyze what is European right of contract. First part searches the sources of European freedom of contract. The multiplicity of rules and practices allows seeing a defect of definition. The first chapter underlines that the autonomy of the will is relative because it is subjective and it evolves according to the balances in contract. It determines that this freedom is joined and is partly the result from the Romano-Germanic civil code. The second chapter allows noticing that the autonomy of the will is henceforth a very relative principle in international private law.Pluralism of the law involves that the contractual freedom is a notion without spring neither stable nor established. The European private international law is under construction and organized in a functional waySecond part studies the European contractual freedom from the point of view of the substantive law. This freedom is a relative principle in symbiosis with the necessities of protection of the parties of contract and necessities of the European business. It is about a subjective principle because of the European law and order (it contains the economic law and order, the lois de police and the classic international law and order), and because of principles in the European construction. The first chapter draws the frame and the general structure of the European contractual freedom. It participates in the business and owes respect the essential principles of the Union in the direction of objective right-law (freedom of establishment, just competition, commercial equality); it is characterized by the European principal development and by the commercial practice. Second chapter notes that the freedom is integrated into the European Union. It is functional and finds balance by corresponding with the law and order to the subjective direction (protection of the weakest parties and the fundamental rights).

Les relations commerciales avec la Chine s’intensifiant, la conclusion de contrats internationaux est de plus en plus fréquente pour les opérateurs économiques étrangers et chinois. En vertu du principe de la liberté contractuelle, les parties à un contrat international peuvent choisir une loi applicable à leur contrat afin de bénéficier de plus de souplesse, de sécurité juridique ou de neutralité. Cette étude basée notamment sur les actualités juridiques chinoises a pour objectif de donner une référence pratique sur la réglementation des contrats internationaux en Chine à travers la présentation des principes généraux du contrat international chinois, la conclusion, l’exécution et les difficultés d’application des contrats internationaux. Il y est aussi analysé l’application de la Convention des Nations Unies sur les contrats de vente internationale de marchandises, ainsi que certains cas de refus de reconnaissance et d’exécution de sentences étrangères en Chine. En traitant exclusivement des contrats internationaux en matière de commerce international, cette étude pourra offrir aux investisseurs étrangers désirant investir en Chine une vision relativement complète sur l’actualité de la réglementation des contrats internationaux en Chine et ainsi permettre aux parties de bien choisir la loi qui devra régir leurs rapports contractuels envisagés afin de réaliser leurs intérêts et d’éviter les mauvaises surprises liées à la méconnaissance des lois et des règlements chinois en vigueur. / China’s economy has grown significantly during the past thirty years under a policy of socialist market economy. For the purposes of international trade, Chinese international contract law makes reference to western law, while maintaining distinctive features stemming from political influence and Chinese culture. As trade relations with China intensify, foreign and Chinese economic entities are entering into an increasing number of international contracts. In accordance with the principle of contractual freedom, parties to an international contract may choose which law will govern their contract, so as to enjoy a greater degree of flexibility, legal safety or neutrality. This study, based mainly on Chinese legal developments, aims to provide a practical reference on the regulation of international contracts in China by presenting the general principles of international Chinese contracts, and the negotiation and execution of international contracts, as well as difficulties related to their application. It also analyses the manner in which the United Nations Convention applies to international sale of goods contracts, as well as certain cases of refusal to recognize and enforce foreign arbitral awards in China. By dealing exclusively with international contracts related to international trade, this study will provide foreign investors wishing to invest in China with a comprehensive picture of the current regulation of international contracts in China and will allow the parties to choose which law to govern their contractual relationships in order to achieve their objectives and avoid any unpleasant surprises resulting from their lack of awareness of current Chinese laws and regulations.