ABSTRACT
In the last chapter we visited classical contract theory and considered the various challenges to it, with particular emphasis on those posed by the regulation state and welfarism. The response ofmanymembers of the judiciary and the legislature has been to try to adjust the classical model so that it better suits the goals of social policy and the marketplace of today. So, for instance, the judiciary has seen fit to provide greater protection for certain categories of people, most notably consumer, in order to mitigate the inequalities of the market place and social life. Later chapters in this book, such as those on implied terms, consideration and unfair terms, will sketch out some of the detail of how some sense of balance has been achieved during this ‘neo-classical’ period. What has emerged is a mixture of approaches in which market individualism still competes for attention with the more modern notion of consumer welfarism. However, the classical, albeit in a modified form, continues to have much influence on how lawyers approach contracts. In the minds of many contemporary academics in the field, this is an unsatisfactory development. A number have suggested that we have only tinkered with the classical model when what is needed is a rethinking of the principles which should underpin this field of law. A growing number of scholars have argued that the very relevance and legitimacy of the assumptions underpinning the classical model are in crisis.
