契约、市场和正义

IF 0.7 4区 社会学 Q2 LAW
Felipe Jiménez
{"title":"契约、市场和正义","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":"{\"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}","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

摘要

摘要:彼得·本森的《交易中的正义》提供了一个令人信服的、内在的、非工具性的黑格尔合同法概念。它还将这种非工具性概念与更广泛的问题联系起来,如市场的社会理论、自由主义正当性和社会经济正义。这本书是一项了不起的成就。因此,它将——也应该——成为契约理论经典的一部分。在这篇评论文章中,我重点讨论了本森在本书第一部分中提出的重建的理论地位。我赞同本森理论的“司法”出发点,并同意应认真对待合同法及其理论范畴。然而,我认为本森的理论处于教义论和全面的合同哲学理论之间的中间位置,这削弱了它为合同法作为一种法律制度提供充分的公共理由的能力。最后,我对本森关于合同和市场的法律概念与分配正义之间关系的描述提出了一些质疑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Contracts, markets, and justice
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
16.70%
发文量
26
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信