ABSTRACT
The categorisation of obligations works, so to speak, in two directions. First, one can talk about the subdivisions operating within the law of obligations: that is to say the subdivisions into contract, tort and restitution (common law) or into contract, quasi-contract, delict and quasi-delict (French law). Secondly, one can talk about classifications which might be said to operate from outside of the obligations category itself. Thus, the distinction between the law of actions and the law of things (Roman law) or between public and private law (civil law) might be said to classifications which function at a higher level than the law of obligations. These systematics raise the question of how these higher categories might affect the sub-categories within the law of obligations. Thus, in French law the distinction between public and private law affects the law of obligations in a fundamental way, as we have already seen (cf Chapter 2 § 2). La responsibilité civile must be distinguished from la responsibilité administrative – the former is governed by the Code civil while the latter is a product only of la jurisprudence of the Conseil d’État – and private agreements must be distinguished from administrative contracts. Equally, the distinction between civil and commercial law has exercised an important influence in the later history of the civil law.104
