1) Many royal laws in the 15th and 16th centuries demand that the central courts and the royal jurisdiction be effectively regulated. Reception of the Rome Act succeeded to be an important element in the process of centralization and unification in this process. Central courts have increased their control and influence over other courts as the appeal authority has gradually dissipated into the world. In France, courts with appeal powers are parliaments and Grand Conseil in different situations. 1 The law applied the by this court is Customary law, elements of Roman Law, jurisprudence and collections of the Case Law. 2 (107)
2) As the common law had been impacted by the Roman Law during it’s the Ecclesiastical Court certain elements of Roman Law are incorporated into Ecclesiastical Practice. This lets to its expansion to across Europe. Later, These elements were also adopted by the secular courts. Use Proprium has developed due to the influence of ius commune through reception and acculturation which means formul adaptation of ius proprium to the culture and forms of learned law. Development of Romano-Canonical Procedure inspire by the ecclesiastical courts is an instance of acculturation. Because writing was largely used in this procedure such as the use of written documents for evidence and written form of witness statements and judgments of the court, it differed from traditional customer procedures.3 (127)
3) Claudel predicated upon the three arguments on the different grounds. In his first argument for defense, he argues then he has not entered into the contract with Macron as the money is not put at disposal of Macron. Classical Roman Law provided a legal ground for this argument as it is required to hand over the thing to conclude a contractus re. Claudel’s second argument is also based on Classical Roman Law as only 4 types of contracts existed in Classical Roman Law and the contract in the present case does not fall within one of these categories of contracts since it included an obligation to pay interest. He can also rely on Laseo Enormis Doctrine. This doctrine stipulates that the prices agreed by the parties can not deviate too much from the just price.4 Claudel would argue that Macron’s obligation to pay interest is not a just price in exchange for the loan of money by the Claudel. His final argument concerns, the change in the financial position of Macron. Because of this change, he argues that he can escape from his obligations relying on Clausula Rule.5 (199)
4) The first point of Claudel does not convince the court because the principle of Consensualism prevails over Claudel’s argument as it found large acceptances since the 16th century. This principle sets out that consensus of parties is adequate and no further requirement exists to conclude a contract.6 His second argument cannot convince the court as Lazeo Enormis lost importance in the 17th century.7 His final argument which argues that because circumstances had changed, he can get away from his obligation under the contract, however, Clausula Rule had lost importance the 17th century and also Pacta Sunt Servanta had gained importance from the 16th century onwards according to this principle all agreement must be honored despite the change of circumstances. 8 (135)
1Lesaffer 2015 (p.360), p.363.
2 Lesaffer 2015 (p.360), p.364.
3 Lesaffer 2015 (p.269), p.271.
4 Feenstra & Ahsmann 1988, p.34
5 Feenstra & Ahsmann 1988, p.29
6 Feenstra & Ahsmann 1988, p.12
7 Feenstra & Ahsmann 1988, p.34
8 Feenstra & Ahsmann 1988, p.19