Law Merchant

It might seem counterintuitive, but commerce is defined by adaptability rather than by circumstance, in that merchants and consumers have always found ways to satisfy their interests even in the face of significant challenges. In some cases, these challenges arise from natural phenomena (the subject of “Acts of God” provisions in many contracts). In others, the challenges are in the form of the formal legal demands of the regime within which businesses operate. To benefit from the protections of a legal regime, a merchant must declare a “principal place of business” and subject himself to the laws and regulations of that jurisdiction.

An interesting question arises when merchants face a legal panorama that appears to conflict with their commercial interests. This lack of harmony is often a matter of positive law, as is the case with government regulation of certain markets or transaction types, and indeed government intervention in the realm of commerce ranges from loose regulatory guidelines to outright prohibition of a market or transaction. Within this framework, merchants and consumers must weight the potential benefits of conforming with the legal requirements imposed on commercial activities —or failing to conform—against the potential costs of doing so.

"""CONTENTS:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
—Introductory Note:
The Importance of understanding the "Lex Mercatoria" Concept for both theory and praxis of Transnational Law and Int’l Commercial Litigation, with an emphasis to the promotion of ad hoc or institutional arbitrations. [p. 3]

—(Index of Authorities) [p. 5]

—I. The Historical Background; The evolutionary course of Lex Mercatoria sedes temporis. [p. 9]

—II. Different scholarly approaches on the trivium of defining the Lex Mercatoria; An attempt towards a conventional definition, according to the formula of "genus proximum-differentia specifica". [p. 14]

—III. The sources of Lex Mercatoria; conceptual antithesis and the on-going debate among scholars. [p. 31]

—IV. A-national Attempts and the Galloping Codification of the Lex Mercatoria; the restatement-like approach of the UNIDROIT Principles of Int’l Comm’l Contracts (UNIDROIT PICC, ed. 2010) and the Lando Commission Principles of European Contract Law (PECLs); the CISG’s paradigm. [p. 34]

—V. The Importance of the International Commercial Terms drafted by the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC INCOTERMS, ed. 2010). [p. 44]

—VI. Exequatur and foreign or a-national arbitral awards issued under the light of Lex Mercatoria’s Provisions (with specific reference to the tendencies of English, French and Greek jurisprudence). [p. 50]

—VII. In stead of Conclusion:
Critical remarks on the "raison d’être" of  the conceptual phenomenon of Lex Mercatoria. [p. 59]

—(Bibliography) [p. 64]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------"""

English version (German version below):

In the eighteenth century, the state of Hesse-Cassel adopted parts of the law merchant pertaining to the use of bills of exchange. The Privy Council and High Appellate Court adapted and changed common rules governing especially who could use bills and what rights and obligations were involved in use and transfer of bills. This article presents several case studies. These show that the regime liberalized rules about which Christians and Jews, burghers and farmers could use bills. They also show that the regime augmented the rights of parties to bills and debt notes, while sometimes limiting the protections of third parties. There appears to have been a broad trend toward expanding the use of paper financial instruments to wider circles of the population and augmenting the rights of bearers and the liabilities of promisors. These changes resulted from a growing demand for a legal framework to transfer capital easily and securely, a demand that can be seen both on a societal scale and in individual actors’ motives. Intellectually, the new laws and policies were constructed from older law merchant principles, imperial common law, and natural law. The changes in law presented here fill a gap in law merchant scholarship, but more importantly they show us how the liberal economic and social order was constructed in concrete steps in Germany under the Old Regime.

Im 18. Jahrhundert übernahm die Landgrafschaft Hessen-Kassel Teile des Wechselrechts (ius cambiale), die insbesondere die Verwendung von Wechseln betrafen. Der Geheime Rat und das Ober-Appellationsgericht adaptierten und veränderten allgemeine Gesetze, die regelten, wer Wechsel verwenden konnte und welche Rechte und Pflichten mit dem Gebrauch und der Übertragung von Wechseln verbunden waren. Die vorgestellten Fallstudien zeigen, dass die Regierung die Gesetze dahingehend liberalisierte, dass die Möglichkeit, Wechsel zu gebrauchen, mehr sozialen Gruppen als bislang zur Verfügung stand. Darüber hinaus wird deutlich, dass die hessel-kasselsche Regierung die Rechte derjenigen Parteien stärkte, die ursprünglich an der Ausstellung des Wechsels oder Schuldscheins beteiligt gewesen waren – manchmal auf Kosten der Rechte später involvierter Dritter. Dadurch dass papierne Finanzinstrumente verbindlicher und verlässlicher und die Rechte ihrer Inhaber gestärkt wurden, weitete sich ihr Gebrauch auf immer größere Kreise der Bevölkerung aus. Diese Veränderungen waren die Antwort auf stärker werdende soziale und individuelle Forderungen nach einem gesetzlichen Rahmen zur einfachen und sicheren Übertragung von Kapital. Die geistigen und theoretischen Grundlagen dieser neuen Geld- und Handelspolitik lieferten ältere handelsrechtliche Grundsätze, das Reichsrecht und das Naturrecht. Die hier vorgestellten Überlegungen füllen eine Lücke in der handelsrechtlichen Forschung, zeigen aber vor allem, wie im frühneuzeitlichen Reich Schritt für Schritt eine liberale Wirtschafts- und Gesellschaftsordnung errichtet wurde.