ambivalent imbroglio home

« Commissioner Copps | Main | States and Countries »

February 04, 2004

Lightly Kept in Bounds

We made the acquaintance of the U.C.C. in Contracts this week, and here is what I learned:

It is fair to say that the draftsmen of the Code had an anticodification or antistatute predilection. They did not want to codify the law, in the continental sense of codification. They wanted to correct some false starts, to point the law in the indicated directions, and to restore the law merchant as an institution for grwoth only lightly kept in bounds by statute.

Yeah, I'll bet. Got to give the "invisible hand of the market" free rein to work its magic, right? That invisible hand is sure working well in media markets, don't you think?.

Posted February 4, 2004 06:34 AM | law school


The whole point of contract law is to make breach as inexpensive as possible. It's hard to swallow, until you think about it from an efficiency standpoint, but I am going to take a wild guess and assume that equity trumps efficiency for you most of the time ;)

Posted by: justin at February 4, 2004 07:51 PM

The drafters of the UCC were also trying to codify what was already going on in business -- stemming not necessarily from common law but as much from trade usage and regular business dealings.

So in that way, it's even kind of Socialist. Turning into law what the citizens were already doing, based on the idea that they knew best how to run their own businesses.

Posted by: Cinnamon at February 5, 2004 09:22 PM

about   ∞     ∞   archives   ∞   links   ∞   rss
This template highly modified from The Style Monkey.