GOOD FAITH: SEMIOTIC APPROACH

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Auer, Marietta; LL.M. (Harvard), Attorney-at-Law (New York), wissenschaftliche Assistentin am Institut für Privatrecht und Zivilverfahrensrecht der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München. Derzeit Inhaberin der Professur für Bürgerliches Recht und Rechtsphilosophie an der Justus-Liebig- Universität Gießen.
Data de Publicação: 2017
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Revista Argumentum (Marília. Online)
Texto Completo: http://ojs.unimar.br/index.php/revistaargumentum/article/view/353
Resumo: The meaning, function and desirable scope of good faith in contractual performance is one of the most pervasive problems of European as well as American contracto law. Yet, the discussion seems to be locked into a set of inescapable dilemmas which frequently reappear as a typical, but unsatisfactory part of academic contrubutions and judicial opinions; namely, the controversies between na individualist ethics of freedom of contract and the opposing altruist value of interpersonal responsibility, between the danger of judicial arbitrariness and the demand for equitable flexibility, and, finally, between the legitimacy of judicial law making and the insistence on judical restraint. This article attempts to show a pattern behind this structure, consisting of a relatively small set of typical arguments which appear in ordered pairs of diametrical oppositions such as those mentioned above. This suggests that good faith language is much less tailored to context and much more dependent on a preexistent structure of stereotyped arguments than it usually appears in the pratice of legal discourse. This insignt implies a new assessment of the cogency of argument patterns deployed in theoretical and doctrinal statements on good faith.
id UNIMAR-1_fd606f52341e65ec0f0193f4ef53b012
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.201.62.80.75:article/353
network_acronym_str UNIMAR-1
network_name_str Revista Argumentum (Marília. Online)
repository_id_str
spelling GOOD FAITH: SEMIOTIC APPROACHThe meaning, function and desirable scope of good faith in contractual performance is one of the most pervasive problems of European as well as American contracto law. Yet, the discussion seems to be locked into a set of inescapable dilemmas which frequently reappear as a typical, but unsatisfactory part of academic contrubutions and judicial opinions; namely, the controversies between na individualist ethics of freedom of contract and the opposing altruist value of interpersonal responsibility, between the danger of judicial arbitrariness and the demand for equitable flexibility, and, finally, between the legitimacy of judicial law making and the insistence on judical restraint. This article attempts to show a pattern behind this structure, consisting of a relatively small set of typical arguments which appear in ordered pairs of diametrical oppositions such as those mentioned above. This suggests that good faith language is much less tailored to context and much more dependent on a preexistent structure of stereotyped arguments than it usually appears in the pratice of legal discourse. This insignt implies a new assessment of the cogency of argument patterns deployed in theoretical and doctrinal statements on good faith.Argumentum Journal of LawRevista Argumentum - Argumentum Journal of LawAuer, Marietta; LL.M. (Harvard), Attorney-at-Law (New York), wissenschaftliche Assistentin am Institut für Privatrecht und Zivilverfahrensrecht der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München. Derzeit Inhaberin der Professur für Bürgerliches Recht und Rechtsphilosophie an der Justus-Liebig- Universität Gießen.2017-04-30info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttp://ojs.unimar.br/index.php/revistaargumentum/article/view/353Argumentum Journal of Law; v. 18, n. 1 (2017): JAN.-ABR./2017; 181-206Revista Argumentum - Argumentum Journal of Law; v. 18, n. 1 (2017): JAN.-ABR./2017; 181-2062359-68801677-809Xreponame:Revista Argumentum (Marília. Online)instname:Universidade de Marília (Unimar)instacron:UNIMARenghttp://ojs.unimar.br/index.php/revistaargumentum/article/view/353/256Declaro, para os devidos fins de direitos e obrigações, sob as penas previstas na legislação vigente, que como autor(a)/detentor(a) dos direitos autorais do artigo submetido, cedo-os à Revista Argumentum, nos termos da Lei Federal nº 9.610 de 19 de fevereiro de 1998 (Lei dos Direitos Autorais).info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2017-05-11T10:59:43Zoai:ojs.201.62.80.75:article/353Revistahttp://ojs.unimar.br/index.php/revistaargumentum/indexhttp://ojs.unimar.br/index.php/revistaargumentum/oaimari.santiago@terra.com.br||revistaargumentumunimar@gmail.com2359-68801677-809Xopendoar:2017-05-11T10:59:43Revista Argumentum (Marília. Online) - Universidade de Marília (Unimar)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv GOOD FAITH: SEMIOTIC APPROACH
title GOOD FAITH: SEMIOTIC APPROACH
spellingShingle GOOD FAITH: SEMIOTIC APPROACH
Auer, Marietta; LL.M. (Harvard), Attorney-at-Law (New York), wissenschaftliche Assistentin am Institut für Privatrecht und Zivilverfahrensrecht der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München. Derzeit Inhaberin der Professur für Bürgerliches Recht und Rechtsphilosophie an der Justus-Liebig- Universität Gießen.
title_short GOOD FAITH: SEMIOTIC APPROACH
title_full GOOD FAITH: SEMIOTIC APPROACH
title_fullStr GOOD FAITH: SEMIOTIC APPROACH
title_full_unstemmed GOOD FAITH: SEMIOTIC APPROACH
title_sort GOOD FAITH: SEMIOTIC APPROACH
author Auer, Marietta; LL.M. (Harvard), Attorney-at-Law (New York), wissenschaftliche Assistentin am Institut für Privatrecht und Zivilverfahrensrecht der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München. Derzeit Inhaberin der Professur für Bürgerliches Recht und Rechtsphilosophie an der Justus-Liebig- Universität Gießen.
author_facet Auer, Marietta; LL.M. (Harvard), Attorney-at-Law (New York), wissenschaftliche Assistentin am Institut für Privatrecht und Zivilverfahrensrecht der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München. Derzeit Inhaberin der Professur für Bürgerliches Recht und Rechtsphilosophie an der Justus-Liebig- Universität Gießen.
author_role author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Auer, Marietta; LL.M. (Harvard), Attorney-at-Law (New York), wissenschaftliche Assistentin am Institut für Privatrecht und Zivilverfahrensrecht der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München. Derzeit Inhaberin der Professur für Bürgerliches Recht und Rechtsphilosophie an der Justus-Liebig- Universität Gießen.
description The meaning, function and desirable scope of good faith in contractual performance is one of the most pervasive problems of European as well as American contracto law. Yet, the discussion seems to be locked into a set of inescapable dilemmas which frequently reappear as a typical, but unsatisfactory part of academic contrubutions and judicial opinions; namely, the controversies between na individualist ethics of freedom of contract and the opposing altruist value of interpersonal responsibility, between the danger of judicial arbitrariness and the demand for equitable flexibility, and, finally, between the legitimacy of judicial law making and the insistence on judical restraint. This article attempts to show a pattern behind this structure, consisting of a relatively small set of typical arguments which appear in ordered pairs of diametrical oppositions such as those mentioned above. This suggests that good faith language is much less tailored to context and much more dependent on a preexistent structure of stereotyped arguments than it usually appears in the pratice of legal discourse. This insignt implies a new assessment of the cogency of argument patterns deployed in theoretical and doctrinal statements on good faith.
publishDate 2017
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2017-04-30
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://ojs.unimar.br/index.php/revistaargumentum/article/view/353
url http://ojs.unimar.br/index.php/revistaargumentum/article/view/353
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv http://ojs.unimar.br/index.php/revistaargumentum/article/view/353/256
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Argumentum Journal of Law
Revista Argumentum - Argumentum Journal of Law
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Argumentum Journal of Law
Revista Argumentum - Argumentum Journal of Law
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Argumentum Journal of Law; v. 18, n. 1 (2017): JAN.-ABR./2017; 181-206
Revista Argumentum - Argumentum Journal of Law; v. 18, n. 1 (2017): JAN.-ABR./2017; 181-206
2359-6880
1677-809X
reponame:Revista Argumentum (Marília. Online)
instname:Universidade de Marília (Unimar)
instacron:UNIMAR
instname_str Universidade de Marília (Unimar)
instacron_str UNIMAR
institution UNIMAR
reponame_str Revista Argumentum (Marília. Online)
collection Revista Argumentum (Marília. Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista Argumentum (Marília. Online) - Universidade de Marília (Unimar)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv mari.santiago@terra.com.br||revistaargumentumunimar@gmail.com
_version_ 1792205595412004864