The Twenty‐First‐Century Law Merchant
2011; Wiley; Volume: 48; Issue: 4 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1111/j.1744-1714.2011.01125.x
ISSN1744-1714
Autores Tópico(s)Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems
ResumoAmerican Business Law JournalVolume 48, Issue 4 p. 775-834 Original Article The Twenty-First-Century Law Merchant Leon E. Trakman B.Com. LL.B., Cape Town; LL.M., S.J.D., Harvard, Leon E. Trakman B.Com. LL.B., Cape Town; LL.M., S.J.D., Harvard Professor of Law & Immediate Past Dean Faculty of Law, University of New South WalesSearch for more papers by this author Leon E. Trakman B.Com. LL.B., Cape Town; LL.M., S.J.D., Harvard, Leon E. Trakman B.Com. LL.B., Cape Town; LL.M., S.J.D., Harvard Professor of Law & Immediate Past Dean Faculty of Law, University of New South WalesSearch for more papers by this author First published: 14 November 2011 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-1714.2011.01125.xCitations: 35 I dedicate this article to the memory of the late David Cavers, Harold Berman, and Arthur von Mehren, whom I was privileged to have as doctorate supervisors on aspects of this topic at the Harvard Law School. I owe particular thanks to Stewart Macaulay for more recent comments, Kunal Sharma and Shu Zhang for their research assistance, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada for research support, and the University of New South Wales for a sabbatical to complete this article. Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Footnotes 1 Luke v. Lyde, (1759) 97 Eng. Rep. 614, 618 (K.B.); 2 Burr. 882, 887 (Lord Mansfield). 2 The Law Merchant has its historical roots in medieval times. Since then, its definition has undergone significant change and remains disputable, at best. At its core, the Law Merchant refers to a trans-regional system of self-regulation, enforcing customary laws, inspired from merchant practice, to govern mercantile transactions, irrespective of the immediate locations of the transactions or the nationalities of the merchants. This article examines further the plurality of features that contribute to the organization and autonomy of the historical as well as modern Law Merchant. On the medieval Law Merchant, see Gerard Malynes, Consuetudo, Vel, Lex Mercatoria, Or, the Ancient Law-Merchant: In Three Parts According to the Essentials of Traffick (Lawbook Exch., 3d ed. 2009) (1686); W. Mitchell, An Essay on the Early History of the Law Merchant (Cambridge Univ. 2011) (1904); Leon E. Trakman, The Law Merchant: The Evolution of Commercial Law 7– 22 (1983); Francis M. Burdick, What is the Law Merchant? , 2 Colum. L. Rev. 470 (1902); Henry Butterworth, Points in the History of the Law Merchant , 23 Law Mag. Q. Rev. Juris. n.s. 1, 2 (1855) (citing Master v. Miller, 4 T.R. 320); A.T. Carter, Early History of the Law Merchant in England , 232 L.Q. Rev. 232 (1901); Albrecht Cordes, The Search for a Medieval Lex Mercatoria , 5 Oxford Comp. L.F. 1 (2003); Keith Highet, The Enigma of the Lex Mercatoria , 63 Tul. L. Rev. 613, 616–17 (1989); Friedrich K. Juenger, The Lex Mercatoria and Private International Law , 60 La. L. Rev. 1133, 1134 (2000); Philip W. Thayer, Comparative Law and the Law Merchant , 6 Brook. L. Rev. 139 (1936). For skeptical accounts of the Law Merchant, see J.H. Baker, The Law Merchant and the Common Law Before 1700 , 38 Cambridge L.J. 295 (1979); John S. Ewart, What Is the Law Merchant? , 3 Colum. L. Rev. 135 (1903); Charles Kerr, The Origin and Development of the Law Merchant , 15 Va. L. Rev. 350 (1929); F.C.D. Tudsbery, Law Merchant and the Common Law , 34 L.Q. Rev. 392 (1918); Nicholas H.D. Foster, Foundation Myth as Legal Formant: The Medieval Law Merchant and the New Lex Mercatoria , Forum HistoriaeIuris, Mar. 18, 2005, http://fhi.rg.mpg.de/articles/pdf-files/0503foster.pdf. On the alleged growth of a modern, new Law Merchant, see Klaus Peter Berger, The Creeping Codification of the New Lex Mercatoria (2d ed. 2010); Emmanuel Gaillard, Thirty Years of Lex Mercatoria: Towards the Selective Application of Transnational Rules , 10 ICSID Rev.-Foreign Investment L.J. 208 (1995); Clive M. Schmitthoff, International Business Law: A New Law Merchant , in Clive M. Schmitthoff's Select Essays on International Trade Law 20 ( Chia-Jui Cheng ed., 1988) [hereinafter Select Essays]; Tamara Milenković-Kerković, Origin, Development and Main Features of the New Lex Mercatoria , 1 Facta Universitatis (Econ. & Org.), no. 5, 1998 at 87; Alec Stone Sweet, The New Lex Mercatoria and Transnational Governance , 13 J. European Pub. Pol'y 627 (2006). 3 See, e.g., Leon E. Trakman, The Law Merchant: The Evolution of Commercial Law– 22 (1983) at 7–8 (discussing the self-regulating Law Merchant); Harold J. Berman & Colin Kaufman, The Law of International Commercial Transactions (Lex Mercatoria) , 19 Harv. Int'l L.J. 221, 222–23 (1978) (same). 4 See generally Albrecht Cordes, The Search for a Medieval Lex Mercatoria , 5 Oxford Comp. L.F. (2003) at 1 (addressing Law Merchant justice); Emily Kadens, Order Within Law, Variety Within Custom: The Character of the Medieval Merchant Law , 5 Chi. J. Int'l L. 39, 44, 47 (2004) (same); Leon E. Trakman, From the Medieval Law Merchant to E-Merchant Law , 53 U. Toronto L.J. 265, 271 (2003) (same). 5 It is arguable that political and economic interests in promoting transregional trade were also significant drivers behind the conception of a universal Law Merchant. See , e.g., Amalia D. Kessler, A Revolution in Commerce: The Parisian Merchant Court and the Rise of Commercial Society in Eighteenth-Century France 73, 86 (2007) (providing a critique of the procedural virtues associated with the eighteenth-century Law Merchant based on the limited and nonarchival writings of a merchant, Toubeau). 6 For an excellent account of the operation of and deficiencies in the eighteenth-century Law Merchant in France, see Amalia D. Kessler, A Revolution in Commerce: The Parisian Merchant Court and the Rise of Commercial Society in Eighteenth-Century France 73, 86 (2007) (demonstrating how merchants associated with the Parisian Court helped to reconceptualize commerce and ultimately accounted for the demise of corporatism culminating in the revolution of 1789). 7 See, e.g., Charles Kerr, The Origin and Development of the Law Merchant , 15 Va. L. Rev. (1929) at 350, 365–67; Michael T. Medwig, The New Law Merchant: Legal Rhetoric and Commercial Reality , 24 Law & Pol'y Int'l Bus. 589, 593, 611–16 (1993) (contrasting the legal and commercial attributes of the Law Merchant); Stephen E. Sachs, From St. Ives to Cyberspace: The Modern Distortion of the Medieval “Law Merchant,” 21 Am. U. Int'l L. Rev. 685, 692–96 (2006) (disputing, inter alia, the independence of the medieval Law Merchant at the Fair of St. Ives from local law and authorities); see also Charles Donahue, Jr., Medieval and Early Modern Lex Mercatoria: An Attempt at the Probatio Diabolica, 5 Chi. J. Int'l L. 21, 23 (2004) (discussing Wyndham Anstis Bewes's argument in 1923 that mercantile law was entirely separate from common law). It is important to recognize at the outset that any attempt at a comprehensive analysis of the medieval Law Merchant is necessarily tentative. Archival records are sparse, and historical accounts are incomplete. See Amalia D. Kessler, A Revolution in Commerce: The Parisian Merchant Court and the Rise of Commercial Society in Eighteenth-Century France, 86 (2007) at 68, 99, 204 (commenting on the lack of archived resources on the medieval and post-medieval Law Merchant and the subsequent reliance on secondary sources). 8 This “romance” of the Law Merchant was captured, albeit without cynicism, in the title of a widely cited book extolling its virtues: Wyndham Anstis Bewes, The Romance of the Law Merchant (Sweet & Maxwell 1986) (1923). See also Jacob Goodyear, The Romance of the Law Merchant , 34 Dick. L. Rev. 218, 225 (1930) (giving a romanticized image of the Law Merchant). For challenges to romantic depictions of the “modern” Law Merchant, see Leon E. Trakman, The Twenty-First-Century Law Merchant, 48 Am Bus Law J 798 (2011) Part IV. 9 See generally David Schmidtz & Jason Brennan, A Brief History of Liberty 80– 81 (2010) (analyzing the interface between the history of liberty and the development of the Law Merchant); Richard A. Epstein, Reflections on the Historical Origins and Economic Structure of the Law Merchant , 5 Chi. J. Int'l L. 1, 19– 20 (2004) (providing a law and economics perspective on the Law Merchant). 10 For a plural account of the early Law Merchant, see Mary Elizabeth Basile et al., Lex Mercatoria and Legal Pluralism: A Late Thirteenth Century Treatise and Its Afterlife (1998). See also Leon E. Trakman, The Twenty-First-Century Law Merchant, 48 Am Bus Law J 784 (2011) Parts II.A & V. 11 On a plural account of liberalism, see, for example, William A. Galston, Liberal Pluralism 15– 27 (2002). On moral pluralism, see Ruth Chang, Putting Together Morality and Well-Being , in Practical Conflicts: New Philosophical Essays 118, 119 ( Peter Baumann & Monika Betzler eds., 2004); Charles E. Larmore, Patterns of Moral Complexity 131– 150 (1987). On value pluralism and equality, see Michael Walzer, Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality 312 (1984). 12 See Leon E. Trakman, The Twenty-First-Century Law Merchant, 48 Am Bus Law J 788 (2011) Part III.A. 13 See Leon E. Trakman, The Twenty-First-Century Law Merchant, 48 Am Bus Law J 798 (2011) Part IV. 14 Leon E. Trakman, The Twenty-First-Century Law Merchant, 48 Am Bus Law J 798 (2011) Part IV . 15 Christian Petsoulas, Hayek's Liberalism and Its Origins: His Idea of Spontaneous Order and the Scottish Enlightenment 12– 52 (2001). See generally Frederik Hayek, The Constitution of Liberty (1960). 16 See, e.g., Norman Barry, The Tradition of Spontaneous Order , 5 Literature Liberty, no. 2, 1982, at 7; Murray N. Rothbard, Concepts of the Role of Intellectuals in Social Change Toward Laissez Faire , 9 J. Libertarian Stud., no. 2, 1990. 17 On the spontaneous ordering of the Law Merchant, see Bruce L. Benson, The Spontaneous Evolution of Commercial Law , 55 S. Econ. J. 644, 646–51 (1989) [hereinafter Commercial Law]; Bruce L. Benson, The Spontaneous Evolution of Cyber Law: Norms, Property Rights, Contracting, Dispute Resolution and Enforcement Without the State , 1 J.L. Econ. & Pol'y 269, 298–328 (2005). On the modern foundations of such libertarian values, see Andrew Gambles, Hayek: The Iron Cage of Liberty (1996); Ludwig Von Mises, Planning for Freedom and Other Essays and Addresses (1952). See also John Gray, Hayek On Liberty (3d ed. 1998). On value preference in utilitarian philosophy, see, for example, John Stuart Mill, Utilitarianism , in The Basic Writings of John Stuart Mill 241 ( J.B. Schneewind & Dale E. Miller eds., 2002). 18 See generally Illusion of Consent: Engaging with Carole Pateman ( Daniel I. O'Neill et al. eds., 2008) (discussing the foundations of merchant autonomy in contractual consent); Leon E. Trakman, Contracts: Legal Perspectives , in 3.8 International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences 2715– 2719 ( Neil J. Smelser & Paul B. Baltes eds., 2001) (same). 19 See Leon E. Trakman, The Law Merchant , 2 Humane Stud. Rev. 1, 1–3 (1985) (discussing the spontaneous development of merchant law out of merchant practice). 20 On the roots of deontological liberalism in natural law, see William A. Galston, Liberal Purposes: Goods, Virtues and Diversity in the Liberal State 38, 191–212 (1991); Christopher Wolfe, Natural Law Liberalism 185– 217 (2006). On the liberal foundations of modern rights theory, see Leon Trakman & Sean Gatien, Rights and Responsibilities 84– 98, 167–86 (1999). 21 See, e.g., Bruce L. Benson, The Spontaneous Evolution of Commercial Law , 55 S. Econ. J., 646–51 (1989) at 645, 650 (discussing Law Merchant efficiency). On rational efficiency as “preference utilitarianism,” see, for example, John Stuart Mill, Utilitarianism , in The Basic Writings of John Stuart Mill ( J.B. Schneewind & Dale E. Miller eds., 2002) at 241. See generally Frederick Rosen, Classical Utilitarianism from Hume to Mill (2003). 22 See generally Mary Elizabeth Basile et al., Lex Mercatoria and Legal Pluralism: A Late Thirteenth Century Treatise and Its Afterlife (1998) at 181–182 (discussing regulations imposed on merchants by royal authorities); Amalia D. Kessler, A Revolution in Commerce: The Parisian Merchant Court and the Rise of Commercial Society in Eighteenth-Century France, 86 (2007) at 18 (discussing regulations imposed on merchant by royal authorities); id . at 29 (discussing the blurred line between the Parisian Merchant Court and local guilds). 23 See Amalia D. Kessler, A Revolution in Commerce: The Parisian Merchant Court and the Rise of Commercial Society in Eighteenth-Century France, 86 (2007) at 111–112, 211–13 (discussing “just price” as applied to merchants in the eighteenth-century Parisian Law Merchant); Leon E. Trakman, The Law Merchant: The Evolution of Commercial Law– 22 (1983) at 8 (as applied to the medieval Law Merchant). 24 See Lisa Bernstein, The Questionable Empirical Basis of Article 2’'s Incorporation Strategy: A Preliminary Study , 66 U. Chi. L. Rev. 710, 721–27 (1999) (arguing that merchant custom is in flux and does not evolve naturally out of merchant practice). 25 On the influence of law upon the development of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) as a “merchant code,” see Ingrid Michelsen Hillinger, The Article 2 Merchant Rules: Karl Llewellyn's Attempt to Achieve the Good, the True, the Beautiful in Commercial Law , 73 Geo. L.J. 1141, 1160 (1985); Allen R. Kamp, Between-the-Wars Social Thought: Karl Llewellyn, Legal Realism, and the Uniform Commercial Code in Context , 59 Alb. L. Rev. 325, 340 (1995) (noting, for instance, that “Llewellyn's first drafts of the Code provided for a jury composed of merchants to make [factual] determinations”); David Ray Papke, How the Cheyenne Indians Wrote Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code , 47 Buff. L. Rev. 1457, 1459–60 (1999). But see Daniel A. Farber, Toward a New Legal Realism , 68 U. Chi. L. Rev. 279, 299–300 (2001) (book review) (arguing that the use of experts instead of ordinary juries “may be a drastic solution to a minor practical problem”). 26 Articles 1 (general) and 2 (sales) of the UCC, of which Karl Llewellyn was the primary architect, are supposedly grounded in Law Merchant tenets, especially in a functional relationship between commercial law and commercial practice. On the legal realist underpinnings of this functional relationship, see N.E.H. Hull, Roscoe Pound and Karl Llewellyn: Searching for an American Jurisprudence 223– 277 (1997); William Twining, Karl Llewellyn and the Realist Movement (1973); Karl N. Llewellyn, Some Realism About Realism—Responding to Dean Pound , 44 Harv. L. Rev. 1222, 1233–38 (1931). On an American Lex Mercatoria, see George Cairnes, An Inquiry into the Law Merchant of the United States: Or, Lex Mercatorio Americana (2006). 27 Some have challenged efficiency as a pervasive value in monist utilitarianism. See, e.g., Ronald M. Dworkin, Is Wealth a Value? , 9 J. Legal Stud. 191 (1980). For a defense, see, for example, Colin M. Macleod, Liberalism, Justice, and Markets: A Critique of Liberal Equality 6 (1998) (discussing fairness as basic to achieving justice); Richard A. Posner, A Reply to Some Recent Criticisms of the Efficiency Theory of the Common Law , 9 Hofstra L. Rev. 775 (1981). 28 See, e.g., Paul G. Mahoney, The Common Law and Economic Growth: Hayek Might Be Right , 30 J. Legal Stud. 503 (2001). The spontaneity of the common law presumably arises in part from the inductive tradition of common law courts reasoning from case to case. In contrast, in the civil law tradition, law is deduced from the interpretation of principles of civil law primarily contained in civil codes. See, e.g., Mirjan Damaška, A Continental Lawyer in an American Law School: Trials and Tribunals of Adjustment , 116 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1363, 1373–74 (1968) (discussing the differences between civil and common law systems of law). A possible inference is that the common law derives its spontaneity from judicial activism in reasoning “spontaneously” from case to case, as distinct from civil lawyers who reason from first principles contained in code sections. See Mirjan Damaška, Activism in Perspective , 92 Yale L.J. 1189, 1195–96 (1983) (discussing judicial activism in the common law system). 29 Cf. J.H. Baker, The Law Merchant and the Common Law Before 1700 , 38 Cambridge L.J. (1979) at 321 (on the common law's “fluid drive”); John Hasnas, Hayek, the Common Law, and Fluid Drive , 1 N.Y.U. J.L. & Liberty 79 (2004); Paul G. Mahoney, The Common Law and Economic Growth: Hayek Might Be Right , 30 J. Legal Stud. (2001) at 503 (same). Regarding the inefficiency of the common law, see, for example, Richard Posner, Economic Analysis of Law 98 ( 7th ed. 2007) (“The common law method is to allocate responsibilities between people engaged in interacting activities in such a way as to maximize the joint value, or, what amounts to the same thing, minimize the joint cost of the activities.”). But see George L. Priest, The Common Law Process and the Selection of Efficient Rules , 6 J. Legal Stud. 65, 66, 68–72 (1977); Paul H. Rubin, Why Is the Common Law Efficient? , 6 J. Legal Stud. 51, 61 (1977). 30 Cf. Norman Barry, The Tradition of Spontaneous Order , 5 Literature Liberty, no. 2, 1982, at 7; (discussing libertarian idealism in general). See also Francesco Parisi, Toward a Theory of Spontaneous Law , 6 Const. Pol. Econ. 211 (1995) (same). 31 For discussion on the legal foundations of modern commercial codes, see Leon E. Trakman, The Twenty-First-Century Law Merchant, 48 Am Bus Law J 808 (2011) Part IV.D. 32 On value pluralism in commercial transactions, including the Law Merchant, see Leon E. Trakman, Pluralism in Contract Law , 55 Buff. L. Rev. 1031 (2010). Regarding attempts to assess the commensurability of values, including autonomy values, in pluralism, see, for example, Michael Stocker, Plural and Conflicting Values 175– 178 (1990); Bernard Williams, Moral Luck: Philosophical Papers 1973–1980 at 71–82 (1981); David Wiggins, Incommensurability: Four Proposals , in Incommensurability, Incomparabilty and Practical Reason 52, 52–66 ( Ruth Chang ed., 1997). 33 See Leon E. Trakman, The Twenty-First-Century Law Merchant, 48 Am Bus Law J 794 (2011) Part III.B.2 (discussing the malleability of the modern Law Merchant); see also Gunther Teubner, “Global Bukowina”: Legal Pluralism in the World Society , in Global Law Without a State 3 ( Gunther Teubner ed., 1997) (providing an inspiring plural account of the Law Merchant). On imbedding the Law Merchant into codes of law, see Klaus Peter Berger, The Creeping Codification of the New Lex Mercatoria (2d ed. 2010); Hercules Booysen, International Transactions and the International Law Merchant 3– 4 (1995). 34 Cf. Leon E. Trakman, From the Medieval Law Merchant to E-Merchant Law , 53 U. Toronto L.J. 265, 271 (2003) (discussing the contrast between autonomy in the medieval and the modern Law Merchants). 35 On the modern foundation of freedom of contract in consent theory, see F.H. Buckley, Just Exchange: A Theory of Contract 27 (2005) (discussing consent as an expression of free will); Ruth R. Fadan & Tom Beauchamp, A History and Theory of Informed Consent (1986); The Fall and Rise of Freedom of Contract ( F.H. Buckley ed., 1999); James Gordley, The Philosophical Origins of Modern Contract Doctrine 161– 213 (1991). 36 It is arguable that civil law has not endorsed the concept of liberty to contract as readily as in common law. See H.K. Lücke, Good Faith and Contractual Performance , in Essays on Contract 155, 170 ( P.D. Finn ed., 1987) (noting that “[t]he courageous protection of the liberty of the individual is not a dominant theme in the civilian tradition” compared to the common law); see also J.H. Baker, An Introduction to English Legal History 359 ( 4th ed. 2002) (discussing the role of freedom to contract with reference to modern standard form contracts); W.J. Wagner, Who May Accept an Offer: Assignability of Offers , in Formation of Contracts: A Study of the Common Core of Legal Systems 913, 913 ( Rudolf B. Schlesinger ed., 1968) (referencing the notion of freedom to contract through the concept of offer and acceptance). On the philosophical roots of modern liberal democracies including the rights of individuals, see, for example, John Dewey, Reconstruction in Philosophy 25– 52 (1920); Irwin Edman, John Dewey: His Contribution to the American Tradition 86 (1955). For more on functional responses, see, for example, William James, Pragmatism and Other Writings ( Giles Gunn ed., 2000). 37 See J.H. Gebhardt, Pacta Sunt Servanda , 10 Mod. L. Rev. 159, 160, 170 (1947); Hans van Houtte, Changed Circumstances and Pacta Sunt Servanda , in Transnational Rules in International Commercial Arbitration 105 ( Emmanuel Gaillard ed., 1993). 38 For more discussion of good faith in contracting, see infra text accompanying 90, 91. 39 The twenty-first-century Law Merchant is canvassed further in Part VI infra. 40 These different measures of merchant autonomy are discussed infra Part V. 41 See Leon E. Trakman, The Twenty-First-Century Law Merchant, 48 Am Bus Law J 784 (2011) text accompanying 37, 91, 92 (discussing the enforcement of “pacts,” pacta sunt servanda); see also Stephen E. Sachs, From St. Ives to Cyberspace: The Modern Distortion of the Medieval “Law Merchant,” 21 Am. U. Int'l L. Rev. 685, 692–96 (2006) at 717 (addressing participation of merchant suitors in Law Merchant deliberations). 42 For more on the significance of pacts in the growth of transnational arbitration, see Leon E. Trakman, The Twenty-First-Century Law Merchant, 48 Am Bus Law J 826 (2011) Part VI.B. 43 See Trakman, Leon E. Trakman, The Twenty-First-Century Law Merchant, 48 Am Bus Law J 813 (2011) 2, at 10–12 (discussing the institutional regulation of medieval merchant pacts). Multilateral, regional, and bilateral agreements in the twenty-first century are undoubtedly more complex than the pacts between medieval merchants, the treaties between local principalities, and the fealty foreign merchants showed to local potentates. But it would be an overstatement to conclude that pacts between medieval merchants were straightforward while modern investment and trade agreements are not. The complexity of agreements also hinges on the discrete socio-cultural and political context, which is not fixed in time, place, or space. See Part V.A–B. 44 For a more detailed treatment of party autonomy in the choice of law, see, for example, Julian D.M. Lew, Applicable Law in International Commercial Arbitration 225 (1978). I address national and multilateral restrictions in the application of choices of law further in Part VI.C Leon E. Trakman, The Twenty-First-Century Law Merchant, 48 Am Bus Law J 832 (2011). 45 See Leon E. Trakman, The Twenty-First-Century Law Merchant, 48 Am Bus Law J 812 (2011) Part V (discussing the disparate privileges accorded to twenty-first-century merchants). 46 For perspectives on the changing nature of plural legal cultures, see, for example, Werner Menski, Comparative Law in a Global Context: The Legal Systems of Asia and Africa 37– 58 ( 2d ed. 2006); David Nelken, Culture, Legal , in 1 Encyclopedia of Law and Society: American and Global Perspectives 369, 369–74 ( David S. Clark ed., 2007); David Nelken, Using the Concept of Legal Culture , 29 Australian J. Leg. Phil. 1, 7 (2004). 47 See also Leon E. Trakman, The Twenty-First-Century Law Merchant, 48 Am Bus Law J 812 (2011) Part V. 48 Regarding these diverse influences on the autonomy of the modern Law Merchant, see Leon E. Trakman, The Twenty-First-Century Law Merchant, 48 Am Bus Law J 812 (2011) Part V. See also Filip De Ly, International Business Law and the Lex Mercatoria 96, 129–30 (1992); Klaus Peter Berger, The New Law Merchant and the Global Market Place—a 21st Century View of Transnational Commercial Law , in The Practice of Transnational Law 1 ( Klaus Peter Berger ed., 2001). 49 See, e.g., Gerard Malynes, Consuetudo, Vel, Lex Mercatoria, Or, the Ancient Law-Merchant: In Three Parts According to the Essentials of Traffick (Lawbook Exch., 3d ed. 2009) at 6–10. See generally The Black Book of the Admiralty ( Travers Twiss ed., 1871); The Little Red Book of Bristol ( Francis C. Bickley ed., 1900); P. Studer, The Oak Book of Southampton (1910); Leon E. Trakman, The Law Merchant: The Evolution of Commercial Law– 22 (1983) at 7–8. 50 See Amalia D. Kessler, A Revolution in Commerce: The Parisian Merchant Court and the Rise of Commercial Society in Eighteenth-Century France, 86 (2007) at 16–95. As for Law Merchant institutions being absorbed into, or otherwise influencing the civil and common law systems, see, for example, M.F. Morris, An Introduction to the History of the Development of Law 222, 274 (1909). 51 See Amalia D. Kessler, Enforcing Virtue: Social Norms and Self-Interest in an Eighteenth-Century Merchant Court , 22 Law & Hist. Rev. 71, 89–90 (2004) (discussing the “just price”); see also Leon E. Trakman, The Law Merchant: The Evolution of Commercial Law– 22 (1983) at 86 (discussing judicial application of fairness standards). Regarding the determination of the fair price in the eighteenth-century Parisian Merchant Court, see Amalia D. Kessler, A Revolution in Commerce: The Parisian Merchant Court and the Rise of Commercial Society in Eighteenth-Century France, 86 (2007) at 79, 114, 131. On the influence of a broad sense of fairness upon the decisions of medieval merchant courts, see, for example, Leon E. Trakman, The Law Merchant: The Evolution of Commercial Law– 22 (1983) at 18; Stephen E. Sachs, From St. Ives to Cyberspace: The Modern Distortion of the Medieval “Law Merchant,” 21 Am. U. Int'l L. Rev., 692–96 (2006) at 760. 52 See Stephen E. Sachs, From St. Ives to Cyberspace: The Modern Distortion of the Medieval “Law Merchant,” 21 Am. U. Int'l L. Rev., 692–96 (2006) at 717. 53 See infra text accompanying 61, 62 and Part III.A. 54 But see infra text accompanying 69, 86-93. 55 See, e.g., J.H. Baker, The Law Merchant and the Common Law Before 1700 , 38 Cambridge L.J. (1979) at 299 (arguing that the Law Merchant was not autonomous in the early common law system). 56 1 William Blackstone, Commentaries *45, 273. 57 For a challenge to this stable Law Merchant system, see J.H. Baker, The Law Merchant and the Common Law Before 1700 , 38 Cambridge L.J. (1979) at 299 (arguing that, far from being distinct from the common law, common law courts adopted the Law Merchant on a party establishing proof of a merchant usage); F.C.D. Tudsbery, Law Merchant and the Common Law , 34 L.Q. Rev. (1918) at 393 (discussing the incorporation of usages into the common law). 58 See James Stevens Rogers, The Early History of the Law of Bills and Notes 21 (1995); Frederic rockwell Sanborn, Origins of the Early English Maritime and Commercial Law 326– 327 (193
Referência(s)