Band 18, Heft 3

This paper is aimed at illustrating how the traditional idea of “inalienability” of personality rights has been reshaped and transformed by the increasing commodification of corporeal and incorporeal components of identity. Three different legal regimes have recently emerged in Europe: market-inalienability with regard to body rights; limited inalienability rules with regard to personal data; modified contract law applicable to incorporeal components of identity – such as name or likeness – having commercial value. The objective of this paper is to describe each of these models and provide a contribution both to the theory of inalienability and of contract law.

This article explores on two ‘strangers’ for contract law – even though, at second sight, they both would seem truly seminal to contract law. This is, on the one hand, investment advice and more generally (pre-)contractual relationships on the giving of information in capital markets – arguably the largest market and contract segment in developed market economies, or at least one of the largest, but typically rather discussed only in specialised circles. This is, on the other hand, a broad pluralist interdisciplinary theory on trust in its relationship to information – largely underexplored and even missing in parts, even though absolutely core for all trust elements in contracts. There are not few of them. The core argument is that, if sociological, ethical and philosophical approaches are included, the outcome is grossly different from what ensues from the reference to the findings of institutional economics – so far dominant at least in financial services contracts. This is true namely for the desirable design of information, for the focus on specific groups of addressees and as well for the (traditionally rather high) prerequisites of pre-contractual liability.

This article provides an overview of the most relevant cases decided by the Court of Justice of the European Union concerning contract law. The present issue covers the period between the beginning of January 2022 and the end of June 2022. Out of a total of 270 judgments decided in this period, 52 had a contract law dimension.