The longest chapter of the book is dedicated to Kant’s core argument against Constant. Kant’s essay contains three formulations of the same idea: that lying, or a right to lie, would undermine the possibility of contracts, and of the duties and rights that contracts generate. Kant is convinced that this would be disastrous for humankind. That is why he claims, against Constant, that lying – not an unconditional duty of truthfulness – would be the downfall of society. The chapter discusses the enigmatic notion of a ‘source’ of right or rights (which should not, it is argued, be equated with the social or original contract); and it subjects two slightly different reconstructions of the core argument to philosophical scrutiny, concluding that both are untenable. It seems that, in 1797, Kant revived Michaelis’s argument, which he had appropriated and then abandoned earlier in his philosophical development. This negative result does not, however, lessen Kant’s absolutism because the ethical duty of truthfulness is still in place.

The chapter explores the application of restraint of trade, a common law notion, to professional tennis, particularly as pertains to relations between agents and players. The chapter goes on to show the regulation of restraint of trade in the English common law and then applies its findings to sport law more generally. It goes on to identify restraints arising from national federations and state regulation, as well as those emerging from contractual relations between players and agents. The chapter then proceeds to apply the concept to professional tennis, particularly in respect of agency agreements with a focus on the Zverev case before the courts of England. The chapter also ponders whether restrictions in national team selections as well as bans imposed by transnational tennis stakeholders have the same or similar effect as the aforementioned restraints.

Psychology and law, by their nature, are deeply entwined. Both are about human behavior – understanding it, modifying it, regulating it. Psychology’s research engagement with legal topics enjoys a long history, but until recently has been largely limited to clinical assessment (e.g., capacity, insanity) and police and trial evidence and procedures (e.g., eyewitnesses, jury instructions). The traditional canon of “Psychology & Law” research gained prominence when DNA evidence revealed that many wrongful convictions involved problems foreseen by psychologists. Also, the emergence of “Behavioral Law & Economics” likely provided more legitimacy to law’s engagement with empirical psychology topics and methods, spurring “Law & Psychology” teaching and research in law schools. The expanded range of research can be found across the US law curriculum as illustrated in four main first-year courses – Criminal Law, Torts, Contracts, and Property – and two commonly taken or required courses – Evidence and Professional Responsibility. The current experimental jurisprudence boom has added to the topics and methods used in this research and amplifies the existing trend in which psychology engages more closely with the content and values of law.

A contract is an important tool for organizations to obtain and sell resources, and its value is typically measured by the benefit acquired through the exchange. Viewing a contract only through this instrumental lens, however, leaves significant value unrealized. A contract is not just a tool for acquisition, but also a mechanism for governance, an instrument of coordination, and a relational lever to build trust and familiarity over time. The chapter identifies how organizations can use their legal knowledge of contracts to generate a collaborative advantage for both parties. The chapter will first explore how a contract can be a source of cocreated collaborative advantage. It will then show that contracting parties build trust by going through three levels of trust in order to have a trust-based relational contract from which significant value can be harvested. Finally, the chapter will examine how firms can preserve contractual value when trusting relationships are either limited or absent.

This chapter brings together the research findings and answers the main research question, namely how the legal framework can contribute to a achieving a fair(er) balance between the interests of musicians and their main corporate partners. It summarises the potential bottom-up initiatives, as well as the possible regulatory action identified throughout the book.

This chapter delves into the question of the impact of extraterritorial and secondary sanctions on private contractual relations. It opens with a discussion of the characterisation of extraterritorial and secondary sanctions as potential legal or factual impediments to the performance of contractual obligations. A detailed analysis of the case law follows, bringing to the fore some degree of reluctance on the part of judicial authorities to allow operators to suspend the performance of their contractual obligations or to terminate contractual relations on account of their exposure to extraterritorial or secondary sanctions, at least in the absence of sanctions or force majeure contractual clauses. The chapter also explores the potential tension between such sanctions, on the one hand, and measures – commonly referred to as blocking statutes – enacted by states or by the EU to thwart their effects, on the other hand. A discussion, in this respect, of the relevant case law reveals a quest for a balance between policy objectives and economic soundness and shows the existence of incongruent views on the compatibility of sanctions clauses with blocking statutes.

Sanctions are intrinsically complex. Implementation of sanctions regulations often entails navigating an extremely dynamic environment consisting of numerous restrictions and prohibitions, difficulties in interpretation, inconsistent measures adopted by imposing jurisdictions and countermeasures. This has been evident following the sanctions against Russia, often described as unprecedented in scale. The more frequent resort to sanctions further means that an increasing number of international contractual relationships are affected. Financial institutions operating globally are particularly impacted. This is exacerbated by the use of secondary sanctions which remain a controversial foreign policy tool and even subject to countermeasures, for example, blocking statutes. Consequently, financial institutions and other economic operators with an international presence, torn between two conflicting regimes, face an unsolvable legal dilemma. This uncertainty extends to the termination of contracts involving persons or activities subject to secondary sanctions. Although in most cases international (financial) contracts contain sanctions clauses (often under force majeure provisions), it remains unclear whether these can be relied on, especially where the institution’s own jurisdiction opposes secondary sanctions. This chapter presents in more detail what are the practical challenges in sanctions implementation. It focuses on financial institutions and provide recommendations on how such challenges could be addressed.

A remedy is specific when the plaintiff seeks to get the court to coerce the defendant into doing (or not doing) a particular thing. The word ‘coercion’ is used advisedly. The court orders the defendant to do (or not to do) the particular thing, and if the defendant refuses to comply, the court may use measures such as imprisonment, sequestration and fines to encourage compliance with its order. The two most important examples of specific relief in Australia are the decree of specific performance and the injunction. This chapter will consider specific performance, and the next chapter will consider injunctions. Specific performance relates to ordering the defendant to comply with the terms of a contract, but injunctions may be ordered across private law and beyond. Specific performance is exclusively equitable, and generally operates in relation to a common law cause of action; namely, breach of contract.

This chapter argues that, even if emerging economies actively promote hybrid procedures and workouts and create a simplified insolvency framework for micro- and small enterprises (MSEs), ordinary insolvency proceedings will still play a significant role in the economy. On the one hand, they will serve as the primary mechanism for the reallocation of assets of nonviable medium and large enterprises (MLEs). On the other hand, formal reorganization procedures can still be relevant for viable MLEs unable to complete a workout or hybrid procedure due to several factors, including the lack of trust in the debtor’s management team or the need to use some provisions exclusively available in formal insolvency proceedings. Therefore, emerging economies should make sure to improve the efficiency of their ordinary insolvency proceedings. Nonetheless, they cannot adopt the type of complex procedure heavily supervised by courts existing in countries with strong institutional environments. Instead, they need to implement a procedure that should not require significant court involvement. This chapter explains how this goal can be achieved while making the procedure more attractive to debtors and creditors.

Legal technologies using AI-augmented algorithms to translate the purpose of a law into a specific legal directive can be used to produce self-driving contracts, that is, a contract which instead of relying on a human referee to fill gaps, update, or reform the provisions of the contract, uses data-driven predictive algorithms to do so instead. Self-driving contracts are not simply science fiction; not only are self-driving contracts possible, they are in fact already with us.