•     |    
    Initial credits
  • 00:06    |    
  • 01:53    |    
    Good faith as a legal principle
  • A source of important debate
  • 03:48    |    
    Uses and benefits to the Good Faith principle
    • A comprehensive and dogmatic structure
    • Culpa in contrahendo
    • Agreements beyond contractual law
  • 10:46    |    
    Further development of the Good Faith principle
  • 11:39    |    
    Disadvantages to the Good Faith Principle
    • Risks of imparting ideology
    • Judicial activism
    • Use for purposes not comprehended by existing law
    • The Hayekian disadvantage
  • 18:43    |    
    Cases of difference between Anglo-Saxon and European law
    • Case 1: Partial delivery
    • Case 2: Dissolution of partnership under profit
    • Case 3: Non-competition clause
    • Case 4: Non-eviction
  • 25:15    |    
    Worldwide use for the Good Faith principle
  • 27:15    |    
    Final credits

Good Faith in the Civil Law of Contracts

New Media  | 26 de mayo de 2014  | Vistas: 82

Hans-Bernd Schäfer speaks of the Good Faith principle, a debated ground rule that exists within contractual law in many countries, despite its rejection as a legal principle in civil court. The Good Faith principle is dogmatic and comprehensive, and not as narrow as other such applied exceptions to existing norm. Even without a contract, Schäfer states, there should be some agreement between two parties that holds both accountable to certain reasonable duties. The main disadvantages to the Good Faith principle include: risks of imparting ideology, judicial activism, and the use for purposes for which law is not properly designed. Cases of difference between Anglo-Saxon and European law, however are among potential beneficial implementations. When employed carefully and as a mechanism of last resort, the Good Faith Principle is a tool of worldwide use with several reasonable applications.