The principle of contractual autonomy has been a fundamental concept in contract law for a considerable period of time, safeguarding the liberty of parties to establish agreements based on their own conditions. Nonetheless, it is important to note that the liberty to draught contracts is not without limitations, as provisions that contravene the principles of public policy may be deemed unenforceable. The present study investigates the intricate equilibrium between contractual autonomy and public policy in the domain of contract law, with a particular emphasis on the impact of European human rights law on this equilibrium. This paper conducts an analysis of the factors that courts take into account when determining the boundaries of contractual autonomy and the extent of public policy in contract law, drawing upon constitutional provisions, judicial rulings, and human rights jurisprudence from multiple jurisdictions. This study examines the influence of significant cases from the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union on the advancement of contractual autonomy and public policy within the realm of contract law. Additionally, it addresses the difficulties that arise in reconciling these conflicting interests. The article culminates by conducting a comparative evaluation of diverse methodologies for reconciling contractual independence and public policy within the framework of contract law. Additionally, the paper provides suggestions for forthcoming research and policy development in this domain. This paper offers a comprehensive comprehension of the intricate correlation between contractual autonomy and public policy within the realm of contract law, as well as the impact of human rights law on shaping this correlation.
Citation: Vora S. (2023) From Ink to Indelibility: Tracing The Alchemic Transformation of Contract Law into A Constitutionally Entrenched Framework, forged by The Fire of Strasbourg and Tempered by The Forging Hammer of Luxembourg, Global Journal of Politics and Law Research, Vol.11, No.3, pp.31-40