Abstract
In a recent article, Brian Bix has raised some important concerns about general and universal theories of contract law. Particularly, he has claimed that differences within doctrinal areas like contract law, and across different jurisdictions, undermine the plausibility of general and universal theories, which might end up being descriptively inaccurate, and even legitimizing unjust practices. This article is a partial response to Professor Bix’s insights, and argues why, despite his legitimate concerns, universal theories of contract law are plausible—and preferable over local theories.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
