About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


78 Nw. U. L. Rev. 340 (1983-1984)
Values in Contract: Internal and External

handle is hein.journals/illlr78 and id is 348 raw text is: Copyright 1983 by Northwestern University School of Law Printed in U.S.A. Northwestern University Law Review Vol 78, No. 2 VALUES IN CONTRACT: INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL Ian . Macneil* I. INTRODUCTION ............................................ 341 II. THE CONTRACT DIMENSION .............................. 343 III. VALUES IN CONTEXT: CONTRACT BEHAVIOR AND ITS INTERNAL PRINCIPLES AND RULES ........................ 346 A. Common Contract Norms ............................. 347 B. Common Contract Norms and the Discrete Norm.- Enhancing Discreteness and Presentiation ............. 349 C. Common Contract Norms and the Relational Norms .. 350 D. Commentary .......................................... 351 1. Common Contract Norms ......................... 351 2. The Discrete Norm ................................ 355 a. Values of the Discrete Norm .................. 355 b. Relationship Between Values of the Discrete Norm and Values of the Other Common Contract Norms ............................... 360 3. The Relational Norms ............................. 361 a. Values of the Relational Norms ............... 362 b. Relationship Between Values of the Relational Norms and Values of the Other Common Contract Norm s ............................... 363 c. Are the Values of the Relational Norms Contrary to the Values of the Discrete Norm?. 364 IV. VALUES IN CONTEXT: EXTERNAL SOCIAL RESPONSES ..... 367 A. Introduction .......................................... 367 1. Internal-External, Sovereign-Nonsovereign ......... 367 2. Prohibition, Nonintervention, and Total Control.. 368 B. External Social Responses. Values in Sovereign Positive L aw .................................................. 369 * This Article is a revision of a paper prepared for the Conference on Philosophical Jurispru- dence of Contract Law at the Westminster Institute for Ethics and Human Values, Westminster College, London, Canada, November 20-21, 1981 and May 15, 1982. I am greatly indebted to Nancy C. Macneil for her extensive editorial help. Roderick W. Macneil made a number of penetrating and helpful suggestions, as did Michael Timmers. The interchanges with my colleagues in a seminar at Northwestern University School of Law and at the Westminster Conference were also very helpful.