{"title":"Contracts, markets, and justice","authors":"Felipe Jiménez","doi":"10.3138/UTLJ-2020-0062","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Peter Benson’s Justice in Transactions offers a compelling internal, non-instrumental Hegelian conception of the law of contracts. It also connects this non-instrumental conception with broader issues like the social theory of the market, liberal justification, and socio-economic justice. The book is a remarkable achievement. As such, it will – and should – become part of the canon of contract theory. In this review essay, I focus on the theoretical status of the reconstruction offered by Benson in Part I of the book. I am sympathetic to the ‘juridical’ starting point of Benson’s theory and agree that contract law and its doctrinal categories should be taken seriously. However, I argue that Benson’s theory sits at a middle position between a doctrinalist account and a full-blown philosophical theory of contracts and that this detracts from its ability to provide an adequate public justification of contract law as a legal institution. Finally, I cast some doubts on Benson’s account of the relationship between his juridical conception of contract and markets and distributive justice.","PeriodicalId":46289,"journal":{"name":"University of Toronto Law Journal","volume":"71 1","pages":"144 - 163"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"University of Toronto Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3138/UTLJ-2020-0062","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Abstract:Peter Benson’s Justice in Transactions offers a compelling internal, non-instrumental Hegelian conception of the law of contracts. It also connects this non-instrumental conception with broader issues like the social theory of the market, liberal justification, and socio-economic justice. The book is a remarkable achievement. As such, it will – and should – become part of the canon of contract theory. In this review essay, I focus on the theoretical status of the reconstruction offered by Benson in Part I of the book. I am sympathetic to the ‘juridical’ starting point of Benson’s theory and agree that contract law and its doctrinal categories should be taken seriously. However, I argue that Benson’s theory sits at a middle position between a doctrinalist account and a full-blown philosophical theory of contracts and that this detracts from its ability to provide an adequate public justification of contract law as a legal institution. Finally, I cast some doubts on Benson’s account of the relationship between his juridical conception of contract and markets and distributive justice.