History and Theory of Good Faith Performance in the United States

S. Burton
{"title":"History and Theory of Good Faith Performance in the United States","authors":"S. Burton","doi":"10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198728733.003.0023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This book Chapter is about breach of contract based on the obligation to perform in good faith, which is implied in virtually every contract in the United States. The Restatement (Second) of Contracts provides: Every contract imposes upon each party a duty of good faith and fair dealing in its performance and enforcement. Similarly, the Uniform Commercial Code provides: Every contract or duty within [the Uniform Commercial Code] imposes an obligation of good faith in its performance and enforcement. These vague formulations, however, beg the practical question: What distinguishes good faith from bad faith performance?The good faith performance doctrine is a relative newcomer to American law. It has burgeoned in importance in recent decades; it now seems that hardly a complaint is filed stating a claim in contract without including an allegation of bad faith. By far, most of these claims are rejected by the courts, most often for good reasons. Enough of them succeed to make it crucial to grasp the shape of current judicial practice. In this Chapter, I will give a brief history of the good faith performance doctrine and present the main current theories of its proper use. We now can see that some lines of development that seemed important only a few years ago are dead ends. In particular, case law treating the good faith obligation as a basis for claims of tortious breach of contract, allowing damages for emotional distress and even punitive recoveries, has vanished except in the insurance context. Similarly, early scholarly commentary treating good faith performance as a post-formation counterpart to the unconscionability doctrine, allowing courts to impose obligations of “contractual morality” or \"altruism\" on the parties, has not gained general favor with the courts. The now-considerable case law has taken on a distinctly free market orientation, regularly construing good faith to protect and serve the parties' justified expectations arising from their promises. I will conclude with some remarks on comparative aspects of good faith.","PeriodicalId":431712,"journal":{"name":"University of Iowa College of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"University of Iowa College of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198728733.003.0023","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

This book Chapter is about breach of contract based on the obligation to perform in good faith, which is implied in virtually every contract in the United States. The Restatement (Second) of Contracts provides: Every contract imposes upon each party a duty of good faith and fair dealing in its performance and enforcement. Similarly, the Uniform Commercial Code provides: Every contract or duty within [the Uniform Commercial Code] imposes an obligation of good faith in its performance and enforcement. These vague formulations, however, beg the practical question: What distinguishes good faith from bad faith performance?The good faith performance doctrine is a relative newcomer to American law. It has burgeoned in importance in recent decades; it now seems that hardly a complaint is filed stating a claim in contract without including an allegation of bad faith. By far, most of these claims are rejected by the courts, most often for good reasons. Enough of them succeed to make it crucial to grasp the shape of current judicial practice. In this Chapter, I will give a brief history of the good faith performance doctrine and present the main current theories of its proper use. We now can see that some lines of development that seemed important only a few years ago are dead ends. In particular, case law treating the good faith obligation as a basis for claims of tortious breach of contract, allowing damages for emotional distress and even punitive recoveries, has vanished except in the insurance context. Similarly, early scholarly commentary treating good faith performance as a post-formation counterpart to the unconscionability doctrine, allowing courts to impose obligations of “contractual morality” or "altruism" on the parties, has not gained general favor with the courts. The now-considerable case law has taken on a distinctly free market orientation, regularly construing good faith to protect and serve the parties' justified expectations arising from their promises. I will conclude with some remarks on comparative aspects of good faith.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
美国诚信行为的历史与理论
这一章是关于基于善意履行义务的违约,这在美国几乎所有的合同中都是隐含的。《合同重述(第二版)》规定:每一合同在其履行和执行中,缔约各方均负有诚实信用和公平交易的义务。同样,《统一商法典》规定:[《统一商法典》]中的每一合同或义务在其履行和执行中均负有诚信义务。然而,这些模糊的表述回避了一个实际问题:如何区分善意和恶意行为?诚信履行原则在美国法律中相对较新。近几十年来,它的重要性与日俱增;现在看来,几乎没有一份诉状在陈述合同中的索赔时不包括对恶意的指控。到目前为止,这些索赔大多被法院驳回,大多数都有充分的理由。这些成功案例的数量之多,使得把握当前司法实践的形态变得至关重要。在这一章中,我将简要介绍诚信履行原则的历史,并介绍目前主要的正确使用诚信履行原则的理论。我们现在可以看到,仅仅几年前看来很重要的一些发展路线已进入死胡同。特别是,除保险领域外,将诚信义务作为侵权违约索赔的基础、允许精神损害赔偿甚至惩罚性赔偿的判例法已经消失。同样,早期的学术评论将诚信行为视为不合理原则的后形成对应物,允许法院对当事人施加“合同道德”或“利他主义”义务,但并未获得法院的普遍支持。现在相当多的判例法已经采取了明显的自由市场导向,经常解释善意,以保护和服务当事人因其承诺而产生的合理期望。最后,我将对诚信的比较方面作一些评论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Independent Board as Shield The Malleability of Patent Rights Disuniformity Institutional Advantage in Competition and Innovation Policy Innovation and Competition Policy, Ch. 9 (2d ed): The Innovation Commons
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1