Mos Geometricus and the Common Law Mind: Interrogating Contract Theory.

Euclidian theories have it that there exist one or a small number of apex principles from which the entire fasciculus of rules of contract law can be logically deduced. Two arguments are marshalled against the Euclidian project. First, that it has been unsuccessfully attempted before – in the form o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Modern Law Review Vol. 82; no. 1; pp. 46 - 71
Autor principal: Swaminathan, Shivprasad
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Wiley-Blackwell Jan2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=133923818&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 133923818
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00267961
        D8H
      jtl: Modern Law Review
      issn: 00267961
      maglogo: Y
    pubinfo:
      dt: Jan2019
      vid: 82
      iid: 1
      pid: 480
      pub: Wiley-Blackwell
    artinfo:
      ui:
        133923818
        10.1111/1468-2230.12388
      ppf: 46
      ppct: 25
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 227KB
      tig:
        atl: Mos Geometricus and the Common Law Mind: Interrogating Contract Theory.
      aug:
        au: Swaminathan, Shivprasad
      su:
        Common law
        Contract theory
        Civil law
        Rationalism
        Euclidean algorithm
      sug:
        subj:
          Common law
          Contract theory
          Civil law
          Rationalism
          Euclidean algorithm
      keyword:
        civil law
        common law
        Euclidian theory
        legal treatise
        rationalism
        will theory
      ab: Euclidian theories have it that there exist one or a small number of apex principles from which the entire fasciculus of rules of contract law can be logically deduced. Two arguments are marshalled against the Euclidian project. First, that it has been unsuccessfully attempted before – in the form of the nineteenth century contract law treatise which emulated the civil lawyer's rationalistic model, mos geometricus – cautioning us against setting much store by its present reincarnation. Second, that the common law's methodology makes it resistant to this form of theorising. Euclidian theory presupposes a picture of rules on which: a) cases involve an application of logically prior rules; b) rules are reliably identifiable by different actors in the legal system; and c) rules normatively range over an indefinite spectrum of future cases. It will be argued that the common law defies this picture of rules thus rendering Euclidian theory analytically impossible.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Copyright of Modern Law Review is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
      item: Modern Law Review
      holder: Wiley-Blackwell
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2019
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N