Contract Theory, Title Transfer, and Libertarianism
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
In the present paper we argue that the theory of contracts embraced by many libertarian scholars and relied upon by them in sundry important debates (e.g. over morality of the fractional reserve banking or loan maturity mismatching etc.), that is, the title transfer theory of contracts (TTT) should be rejected as not being able to account for the binding force of future-oriented contracts, including contracts deemed enforceable by those scholars themselves. The TTT claims that the only contracts that should be legally binding are these where the debtor’s failure to abide by them constitutes a violation of the creditor’s private property rights. However, as we argue, no default of the debtor in a future-oriented contract can in itself amount to such a violation.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
By submitting his/her work to the Editorial Board, the author accepts, upon having his/her text recommended for publication, that Diametros applies the Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license to the works we publish. Under this license, authors agree to make articles legally available for reuse, without permission or fees. Anyone may read, download, copy, print, distribute or reuse these articles without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author, as long as the author and original source are properly cited. The author holds the copyright without any other restrictions. Full information about CC-BY: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode.
References
Anscombe G.E.M. (1957/2000), Intention, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
View in Google Scholar
Atiyah P.S. (1979), The Rise and Fall of Freedom of Contract, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
View in Google Scholar
Block W.E. (2016), “Forestalling, Positive Obligations and the Lockean and Blockian Provisos: Rejoinder to Stephan Kinsella,” Ekonomia–Wroclaw Economic Review 22 (3): 27–41.
View in Google Scholar
Block W.E. (2013), Legalize Blackmail, Straylight Publishing, New Orleans.
View in Google Scholar
Block W.E. (2003), “Towards a Libertarian Theory of Inalienability: A Critique of Rothbard, Barnett, Smith, Kinsella, Gordon, and Epstein,” Journal of Libertarian Studies 17 (2): 39–85.
View in Google Scholar
Brinig M.F. (1990), “Rings and Promises,” Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 6 (1): 203–215.
View in Google Scholar
Calabresi G., Melamed A.D. (1972), “Property Rules, Liability Rules, and Inalienability,” Harvard Law Review 85 (6): 1089–1128.
View in Google Scholar
Child J.W. (1994), “Can Libertarianism Sustain a Fraud Standard?,” Ethics 104 (4): 717–744.
View in Google Scholar
Cohen L. (1987), “Marriage, Divorce, and Quasi Rents; or, “I Gave Him the Best Years of My Life”,” The Journal of Legal Studies 16 (2): 267–303.
View in Google Scholar
Davidson D. (2001), Essays on Actions and Events, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
View in Google Scholar
Davidson L. (2015), “Ethical Differences Between Loan Maturity Mismatching and Fractional Reserve Banking: A Natural Law Approach,” Journal of Business Ethics 131: 9–18.
View in Google Scholar
Dominiak Ł. (2019), “Must Right-Libertarians Embrace Easements by Necessity?,” Diametros 16 (60): 34–51.
View in Google Scholar
Evers W.M. (1977), “Toward a Reformulation of the Law of Contracts,” Journal of Libertarian Studies 1 (1): 3–13.
View in Google Scholar
Feenstra R.C., Taylor A.M. (2014), International Economics, Worth Publishers, New York.
View in Google Scholar
Ferguson B. (2018), “Can Libertarians Get Away with Fraud?,” Economics & Philosophy 34 (2): 165–184.
View in Google Scholar
Fletcher G.P. (1978/2000), Rethinking Criminal Law, Oxford University Press, New York.
View in Google Scholar
Fried Ch. (1981/2015), Contract as Promise, Oxford University Press, New York.
View in Google Scholar
Friedman D. (2000), Law’s Order: What Economics has to do with Law and Why it Matters, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
View in Google Scholar
Hohfeld W.N. (1913), “Some Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning,” Yale Law Journal 23 (1): 16–59.
View in Google Scholar
Holmes O.W. (1881/2009), The Common Law, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
View in Google Scholar
Kinsella N.S. (2003), “A Libertarian Theory of Contract: Title Transfer, Binding Promises, and Inalienability,” Journal of Libertarian Studies 17 (2): 11–37.
View in Google Scholar
Kinsella N.S. (2009), “What Libertarianism Is,” [in:] Property, Freedom & Society: Essays in Honor of Hans-Hermann Hoppe, J.G. Hülsmann, N.S. Kinsella (eds.), Ludwig von Mises Institute, Auburn.
View in Google Scholar
Kramer M.H. (2002), “Rights Without Trimmings,” [in:] A Debate Over Rights: Philosophical Enquires, M.H. Kramer, N.E. Simmonds, H. Steiner (eds.), Oxford University Press, New York.
View in Google Scholar
Langdell C.C. (1880), A Summary of the Law of Contracts, Little, Brown, and Company, Boston.
View in Google Scholar
Moore M.S. (1993), Act and Crime: The Philosophy of Action and Its Implications for Criminal Law, Oxford University Press, New York.
View in Google Scholar
Moore M.S. (1997), Placing Blame: A Theory of the Criminal Law, Oxford University Press, New York.
View in Google Scholar
Moore M.S. (2009), Causation and Responsibility: An Essay in Law, Morals, and Metaphysics, Oxford University Press, New York.
View in Google Scholar
Nozick R. (1974/2014), Anarchy, State, and Utopia, Blackwell Publishing, Oxford.
View in Google Scholar
Posner R. (1973), The Economic Analysis of Law, Little Brown, Boston.
View in Google Scholar
Rawls J. (1971/1999), A Theory of Justice, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
View in Google Scholar
Rothbard M.N. (1982/2002), The Ethics of Liberty, New York University Press, New York.
View in Google Scholar
Rothbard M.N. (1962/2009), Man, Economy, and State, Ludwig von Mises Institute, Auburn.
View in Google Scholar
Selgin G., White L.H. (1996), “In Defense of Fiduciary Media – or, We Are Not Devo(lutionists), We Are Misesians!,” Review of Austrian Economics 9 (2): 83–107.
View in Google Scholar
Steiner H. (1994), An Essay on Rights, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.
View in Google Scholar
Steiner H. (2019), “Asymmetric Information, Libertarianism, and Fraud,” Review of Social Economy 77 (2): 94–107.
View in Google Scholar
von Savigny F.C. (1848/1979), Treatise on Possession; or, the Jus Possessionis of the Civil Law, Hyperion Press, Westport.
View in Google Scholar
Zwolinski M. (2016), “The Libertarian Nonaggression Principle,” Social Philosophy and Policy 32 (2): 62–90.
View in Google Scholar