Skip to main content
Log in

Ethics of contract pricing

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study explores the legal and ethical issues associated with contract pricing. In particular, it focuses on a set of legal precedents which have addressed the enforceability of allegedly “unfair” contract prices. Traditionally, the common law has emphasized the consent of the parties. If the parties consented to a given price; it is presumptively fair and enforceable. The cases reviewed in this study, however, seem to draw upon alternative moral conceptions of fairness not normally associated with the common law. The analysis begins by distinguishing the traditional legal conception of fairness from alternative moral conceptions. The cases are then read with a critical eye so as to tease out the underlying principles which best explain them. The analysis illustrates that, notwithstanding judicial rhetoric to the contrary, the courts continue to employ the traditional legal notion of fairness, to the exclusion of alternative moral concerns. The study clarifies an otherwise murky area of the law and illustrates that the legal meaning of fairness differs greatly from the moral one.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Commons, J.: 1924,Legal Foundations of Capitalism (Macmillan Company, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenberg, M.: 1982, ‘The Bargain Principle and Its Limits’,Harvard Law Review 95, p. 741.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fried, C.: 1981,Contract as Promise — A Theory of Contractual Obligation (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., and London, England).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillman, R.: 1981, ‘Debunking some Myths About Unconscionability’,Cornell Law Review 67, p. 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, J.: 1985, ‘Unconscionability and the Federal Chancellors’,Lincoln Law Review 16, p. 21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Komesar, N.: 1981, ‘In Search of a General Approach to Legal Analysis: A Comparative Institutional Approach’,Michigan Law Review 79, p. 1350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macneil, I.: 1980,The New Social Contract — An Inquiry Into Modern Contractual Relations (Yale University Press, New Haven and London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Macneil, I.: 1983, ‘Value in Contract — Internal and External’,Northwestern University Law Review 78, p. 340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mallor, J.: 1986, ‘Unconscionability in Contracts Between Merchants’,Southwestern Law Journal 40, p. 1070.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, M.: 1985, ‘Unconscionability and Article 2 Implied Warranty Disclaimers’,Chicago-Kent Law Review 62, p. 199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trebilcock, M.: 1980, ‘An Economic Approach to the Doctrine of Unconscionability’, in B. Reider and J. Swan, eds.,Studies in Contract Law (Butterworths, Toronto).

    Google Scholar 

  • White, J. and R. Summers: 1988,Handbook of the Law Under the Uniform Commercial Code (West Publishing, St. Paul, Mn.).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Daniel T. Ostas is an Assistant Professor at the College of Business and Management, University of Maryland. He holds both a J.D. and a Ph.D. A member of the Indiana Bar since 1980, Dr. Ostas has published several articles on real estate and antitrust law. This present paper derives, in part, from his dissertation entitledEconomic Logic of Unconscionability Adjudication.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ostas, D.T. Ethics of contract pricing. J Bus Ethics 11, 137–145 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00872321

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00872321

Keywords

Navigation