I don’t know the article, but anyone who has interacted with the civilian tradition (where most of private law is in statutory form) will find the author’s position that you describe rather strange.

If Ontario codified its contract law into a Contracts Act (cf India) would that mean that all contracts made in Ontario would be ‘statutory claims’ and no one had any ‘contractual rights’ any more?

I think the position confuses an inquiry into what makes a rule count as a legal rule (judge-made or statutory) and what makes a rule count as a rule of contract law (see Steve Smith, Contract Theory).

Lionel

 

 

Dear Colleagues:

 

Many months ago I read a reference to an article arguing that the statutory exceptions to privity of contract are not really exceptions since a person relying on a statutory claim is in essence suing to enforce an entitlement granted by statute rather than relying solely on the contractual right. Unfortunately, and embarrassingly I cannot seem to find where I found that article referenced (I believe that it was in an Australian treatise but I have looked and looked to no avail). Does anyone know of this article? I would like to read it and cite it potentially.

 

Thank you in advance for any assistance!

 

Sincerely,  

 

 

Jason Neyers
Professor of Law
Faculty of Law
Western University
Law Building Rm 26
e. jneyers@uwo.ca
t. 519.661.2111 (x88435)