PREFACE | | v | |
TABLE OF CONTENTS | | vii | |
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS | | xiii | |
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION | | 1 | |
| | 1 | |
| �� 2. Why Develop a European Private Law? |
| | 2 | |
| �� 3. The Roads Toward a European Private Law: Centralist Methods |
| | 6 | |
| | 6 | |
| B. Intervention by the European Union and Issues of Competence |
| | 7 | |
| | 9 | |
| 2. Secondary Community Law |
| | 10 | |
| C. Unification through International Treaties |
| | 15 | |
| D. A European Private Law through the Judgments of the European Court of Justice |
| | 19 | |
| E. The Contribution of the European Court of Human Rights |
| | 22 | |
| | 22 | |
| | 23 | |
| | 24 | |
| | 26 | |
| F. Centralist Methods: An Evaluation |
| | 28 | |
| �� 4. Objections to Centralist Methods; a European Civil Code? |
| | 28 | |
| | 28 | |
| B. The Idea of a Binding Codification seems to be Contrary to the Spirit of the Times |
| | 29 | |
| C. An Imposed Codification of Rules Does Not Create Uniform Law |
| | 30 | |
| D. An Imposed Civil Code Neglects the Cultural Differences Between Countries |
| | 31 | |
| E. Anticipating Specific National Problems will Become More Difficult |
| | 32 | |
| F. The Making of a European Civil Code Creates More than is Necessary considering the Objectives of the European Union |
| | 32 | |
| �� 5. Assessment of the Objections |
| | 33 | |
CHAPTER 2 NON-CENTRALIST METHODS TOWARDS A IUS COMMUNE | | 35 | |
| | 35 | |
| �� 2. Principles as the Precursors to a European Civil Code: Soft Law as a Model |
| | 35 | |
| | 35 | |
| B. The Principles of European Contract Law |
| | 37 | |
| C. The Unidroit Principles of International Commercial Contracts |
| | 39 | |
| �� 3. Legal Science and Legal Education |
| | 42 | |
| | 42 | |
| B. Drawing Inspiration from a Former Ius Commune? A Discussion |
| | 43 | |
| C. A European Legal Science? |
| | 45 | |
| D. European Legal Education? |
| | 54 | |
| | 57 | |
| �� 5. Reception of Law: an Economic Analysis |
| | 59 | |
| | 59 | |
| | 61 | |
| C. Eight Possible Objections to the Free Movement of Legal Rules |
| | 66 | |
| | 70 | |
CHAPTER 3 CIVIL LAW AND COMMON LAW: THE DISTINGUISHING FEATURES | | 73 | |
| | 73 | |
| �� 2. Civil Law and Common Law: the Distinguishing Features |
| | 74 | |
| A. Distinguishing Features of the Civil Law Tradition |
| | 75 | |
| | 75 | |
| | 77 | |
| 3. Systematisation and the Programmatic Desire Thereof |
| | 79 | |
| 4. Legal Reasoning based on Syllogism |
| | 82 | |
| | 82 | |
| 6. The Prevailing Mentality, including Judicial Style |
| | 83 | |
| | 84 | |
| B. Distinguishing Features of the Common Law Tradition |
| | 84 | |
| 1. No Basis in Roman Law, Instead English Customary Law |
| | 84 | |
| 2. No Codification, but Case Law |
| | 86 | |
| 3. The Absence of Systematisation, or a Desire Thereof |
| | 88 | |
| 4. Reasoning from Case to Case |
| | 90 | |
| | 91 | |
| 6. The Prevailing Mentality, Including Judicial Style |
| | 92 | |
| | 94 | |
| �� 3. Assessment of the Comparison |
| | 94 | |
| �� 4. Is There Still a Difference Between the Civil Law and the Common Law? |
| | 103 | |
CHAPTER 4 MIXED LEGAL SYSTEMS: THE INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK | | 107 | |
| | 107 | |
| �� 2. Mixed Legal Systems from a Theoretical Perspective |
| | 108 | |
| �� 3. Manifestations: Mixed Legal Systems of the World |
| | 110 | |
| A. Group A: The Civil Law Component does not comprise Roman-Dutch Law |
| | 111 | |
| | 111 | |
| 2. The Canadian Province of Quebec |
| | 114 | |
| 3. The American State of Louisiana |
| | 119 | |
| 4. The Republic of Israel |
| | 121 | |
| B. Group B: The Civil Law Component comprises (further developed) Roman-Dutch Law |
| | 125 | |
| C. Group B1: The mix still exists |
| | 125 | |
| 1. The Republic of South Africa |
| | 125 | |
| 2. The Republic of Zimbabwe |
| | 114 | |
| 3. The Republic of Botswana |
| | 135 | |
| 4. The Kingdom of Lesotho |
| | 135 | |
| 5. The Kingdom of Swaziland |
| | 136 | |
| 6. The Republic of Namibia |
| | 136 | |
| 7. The Republic of Sri Lanka |
| | 137 | |
| 8. The Republic of Guyana |
| | 139 | |
| D. Group B2: The mix no longer exists |
| | 139 | |
| | 140 | |
| 2. North America: New Holland |
| | 142 | |
| 3. Suriname (Dutch Guyana) and the Netherlands Antilles (Aruba, Bonaire, Curacao, St. Maarten, Saba and St. Eustatius) |
| | 142 | |
| | 144 | |
| | 144 | |
| B. Insights for the Development of European Private Law |
| | 148 | |
CHAPTER 5 ANGLICISED ROMAN-DUTCH LAW IN SOUTH AFRICA: CONTENT AND METHOD | | 151 | |
| | 151 | |
| �� 2. The Roman-Dutch Law of the Dutch Republic |
| | 151 | |
| | 151 | |
| B. The content of Roman-Dutch Law |
| | 153 | |
| | 153 | |
| | 154 | |
| | 154 | |
| 4. Collections of Case Law |
| | 154 | |
| 5. Opinions of Legal Scholars |
| | 155 | |
| | 155 | |
| | 157 | |
| C. The Method of Roman-Dutch Law |
| | 158 | |
| �� 3. The Anglicisation of Roman-Dutch Law in South Africa |
| | 161 | |
| | 161 | |
| B. Anglicisation: 1820-1910 |
| | 162 | |
| C. A return to Roman-Dutch Law |
| | 165 | |
| �� 4. Anglicised Roman-Dutch Law Today |
| | 174 | |
| �� 5. Content and Method for a European Private Law |
| | 184 | |
CHAPTER 6 THE LAW OF CONTRACT | | 187 | |
| | 187 | |
| | 189 | |
| | 189 | |
| B. Good Faith and the Civil Law |
| | 190 | |
| C. Good Faith and the Common Law |
| | 193 | |
| D. Good Faith in South African Private Law |
| | 195 | |
| E. A European Contract Law? |
| | 198 | |
| �� 3. Formation of Contract: Causa or Consideration |
| | 201 | |
| | 201 | |
| | 202 | |
| C. Common Law: Consideration |
| | 203 | |
| D. Formation in South Africa: No Consideration |
| | 205 | |
| E. European Contract Law? |
| | 207 | |
| �� 4. Formation of Contract: the Despatch and Arrival Theories |
| | 208 | |
| | 208 | |
| B. Civil Law: Dutch, French and German Law |
| | 209 | |
| C. Common Law: English Law |
| | 210 | |
| | 211 | |
| E. European Contract Law? |
| | 212 | |
| �� 5. Remedies for Breach of Contract |
| | 213 | |
| | 213 | |
| | 214 | |
| | 214 | |
| | 215 | |
| | 217 | |
| | 218 | |
| | 218 | |
| | 219 | |
| | 219 | |
| D. Remedies in South Africa |
| | 221 | |
| | 221 | |
| | 222 | |
| | 222 | |
| E. A European Private Law of Remedies? |
| | 223 | |
| | 224 | |
| | 225 | |
| | 226 | |
| �� 6. Towards a Mixed Law of Contract |
| | 227 | |
CHAPTER 7 TORT LAW | | 229 | |
| | 229 | |
| �� 2. The Approach of French and Dutch Law |
| | 230 | |
| �� 3. The Approach of German Law |
| | 232 | |
| �� 4. The Approach of English Law |
| | 234 | |
| �� 5. South African Tort Law |
| | 238 | |
| �� 6. A European Law of Tort? |
| | 242 | |
CHAPTER 8 THE LAW OF PROPERTY | | 245 | |
| | 245 | |
| A. A Minimal Level of Unilormity |
| | 245 | |
| B. European and Private Initiatives |
| | 246 | |
| �� 2. Prolegomena for a European Property Law: the Distinction Between Property Law and the Law of Obligations |
| | 249 | |
| | 249 | |
| B. The Numerus Clausus of Property Rights in the Civil Law |
| | 249 | |
| C. The Defects of the Prevailing Civil Law Theory and the Alternative Common Law Approach |
| | 252 | |
| �� 3. When is there a Property Right and when is there a Personal Right? |
| | 254 | |
| | 254 | |
| B. Looking for Criteria in the Civil Law and in the Common Law |
| | 254 | |
| | 257 | |
| | 260 | |
| �� 4. The Trust in the Civil Law? |
| | 262 | |
| | 262 | |
| B. The Trust Relationship |
| | 263 | |
| C. The Trust in South Africa |
| | 266 | |
| | 268 | |
| �� 5. Towards a Mixed Law of Property |
| | 269 | |
EPILOGUE TOWARDS A EUROPEAN LEGAL MENTALITY? | | 271 | |
| A. An Eclectic View of the Law |
| | 271 | |
| B. A Search for the Optimal Mix of Uniformity and Legal Culture |
| | 272 | |
BIBLIOGRAPHY | | 275 | |
TABLE OF CASES | | 295 | |
INDEX | | 299 | |