Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Good faith and the ubiquity of the “relational”...

Research

Associated organisational unit

Electronic data

  • Good_Faith_and_the_Ubiquity_of_the_Relational_Contract

    Rights statement: This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Campbell, D. (2014), Good Faith and the Ubiquity of the ‘Relational’ Contract. The Modern Law Review, 77: 475–492. doi: 10.1111/1468-2230.12075 which has been published in final form at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1468-2230.12075/abstract This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance With Wiley Terms and Conditions for self-archiving.

    Accepted author manuscript, 134 KB, PDF document

    Available under license: CC BY-NC: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Good faith and the ubiquity of the “relational” contract

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Published

Standard

Good faith and the ubiquity of the “relational” contract. / Campbell, David.
In: Modern Law Review, Vol. 77, No. 3, 05.2014, p. 475-492.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Harvard

Campbell, D 2014, 'Good faith and the ubiquity of the “relational” contract', Modern Law Review, vol. 77, no. 3, pp. 475-492. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12075

APA

Campbell, D. (2014). Good faith and the ubiquity of the “relational” contract. Modern Law Review, 77(3), 475-492. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12075

Vancouver

Campbell D. Good faith and the ubiquity of the “relational” contract. Modern Law Review. 2014 May;77(3):475-492. doi: 10.1111/1468-2230.12075

Author

Campbell, David. / Good faith and the ubiquity of the “relational” contract. In: Modern Law Review. 2014 ; Vol. 77, No. 3. pp. 475-492.

Bibtex

@article{8e768d54159b417fb4843d0ff8c2b8b4,
title = "Good faith and the ubiquity of the “relational” contract",
abstract = "The judgment of Leggatt J in Yam Seng Pte Ltd v International Trade Corporation Ltd shows the common belief that the English law of contract does not have a doctrine of good faith to be mistaken. That law does not have a general principle of good faith, but its doctrine of good faith, articulated through numerous specific duties, is more suitable for the interpretation of contracts according to the intentions of the parties than a general principle which invites the imposition of exogenous standards. That Yam Seng involved a relational contract does not mean that paternalistic exogenous standards should be imposed. It means that the good faith obligations essential even to a commercial contract of this sort must be implied in order to give efficacy to the fundamentally co-operative contractual relationship.",
author = "David Campbell",
note = "This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Campbell, D. (2014), Good Faith and the Ubiquity of the {\textquoteleft}Relational{\textquoteright} Contract. The Modern Law Review, 77: 475–492. doi: 10.1111/1468-2230.12075 which has been published in final form at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1468-2230.12075/abstract This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance With Wiley Terms and Conditions for self-archiving.",
year = "2014",
month = may,
doi = "10.1111/1468-2230.12075",
language = "English",
volume = "77",
pages = "475--492",
journal = "Modern Law Review",
issn = "0026-7961",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Good faith and the ubiquity of the “relational” contract

AU - Campbell, David

N1 - This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Campbell, D. (2014), Good Faith and the Ubiquity of the ‘Relational’ Contract. The Modern Law Review, 77: 475–492. doi: 10.1111/1468-2230.12075 which has been published in final form at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1468-2230.12075/abstract This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance With Wiley Terms and Conditions for self-archiving.

PY - 2014/5

Y1 - 2014/5

N2 - The judgment of Leggatt J in Yam Seng Pte Ltd v International Trade Corporation Ltd shows the common belief that the English law of contract does not have a doctrine of good faith to be mistaken. That law does not have a general principle of good faith, but its doctrine of good faith, articulated through numerous specific duties, is more suitable for the interpretation of contracts according to the intentions of the parties than a general principle which invites the imposition of exogenous standards. That Yam Seng involved a relational contract does not mean that paternalistic exogenous standards should be imposed. It means that the good faith obligations essential even to a commercial contract of this sort must be implied in order to give efficacy to the fundamentally co-operative contractual relationship.

AB - The judgment of Leggatt J in Yam Seng Pte Ltd v International Trade Corporation Ltd shows the common belief that the English law of contract does not have a doctrine of good faith to be mistaken. That law does not have a general principle of good faith, but its doctrine of good faith, articulated through numerous specific duties, is more suitable for the interpretation of contracts according to the intentions of the parties than a general principle which invites the imposition of exogenous standards. That Yam Seng involved a relational contract does not mean that paternalistic exogenous standards should be imposed. It means that the good faith obligations essential even to a commercial contract of this sort must be implied in order to give efficacy to the fundamentally co-operative contractual relationship.

U2 - 10.1111/1468-2230.12075

DO - 10.1111/1468-2230.12075

M3 - Journal article

VL - 77

SP - 475

EP - 492

JO - Modern Law Review

JF - Modern Law Review

SN - 0026-7961

IS - 3

ER -