Buena Fe bajo la ley inglesa: ¿Evolución o revolución?
| Autor | Shy Jackson |
| Cargo | Partner in Pinsent Masons LLP. Bachelor of Laws (LLP) and Master of Laws (LLM) (Cantab). MSc at King's College London. Member in FCIArb and FCInstCES |
| Páginas | 33-51 |
33
Derecho & Sociedad
Asociación Civil
55
Good Faith under English Law: Evolution or revolution?
Buena Fe bajo la ley inglesa: ¿Evolución o revolución?
Shy Jackson*
Pinsent Masons LLP
Abstract:
The doctrine of good faith is not part of the general English law of contract and has a very limited
role in the legal framework that applies to commercial relationships, including construction
contracts. That position however has been slowly changing and this paper examines how
the concept of good faith has been developing in English law and the legal basis on which it
has been introduced, including the recent acceptance by the English courts of the concept of
relational contracts. This is relevant in particular to construction law because there has been
a growing emphasis in the UK on the use of collaborative contracts (such as partnering and
alliancing contracts), which seek to put more emphasis on the wider relationship between
the parties and not just the strict legal obligations expressly provided for in the contract.
This paper therefore also looks at whether the changing approach to good faith can support
the use of collaborative contracts but recognizing that applying such principles, in general,
provides limited guidance and this paper, therefore, uses several factual scenarios to test the
application of the principles and examine what their actual impact may be and would it result
in any dierent outcomes.
Resumen:
La doctrina de la Buena Fe no es parte de la legislación contractual inglesa y su rol se encuentra
limitado en el marco legal que aplica a las relaciones comerciales, incluyendo los contratos
de construcción. Aquella posición, sin embargo, ha variado lentamente y en este artículo
examinamos la manera de cómo el concepto de buena fe se ha desarrollado en la legislación
inglesa y la base jurídica sobre la que ha sido introducido, incluyendo la reciente aceptación
por los tribunales ingleses sobre el concepto de los contratos relacionales. Esto es relevante en
particular para el derecho de construcción, porque ha ido existiendo un énfasis cada vez mayor
en el Reino Unido acerca del uso de contratos colaborativos (como la asociación y la asignación
de contratos), que tratan de poner más énfasis en la relación más amplia entre las partes y no
sólo en las estrictas obligaciones jurídicas, expresamente previstas en un contrato. Por lo tanto,
en este artículo también se examina si el enfoque cambiante de la buena fe puede apoyar
el uso de contratos de colaboración, pero reconociendo que la aplicación de esos principios
proporcional, de manera general una orientación limitada y, por lo tanto, este artículo utiliza una
serie de escenarios fácticos para probar la aplicación de los principios y examinar cuál puede ser
su impacto real. En efecto, se daría lugar a diferentes resultados.
Keywords:
English law - Contract law - Good faith - Construction law - relational contracts -collaborative
contracts - NEC form of contract - alliancing contracts
Palabras Clave:
Derecho inglés – Derecho contractual – Buena fe – Derecho de la construcción – Contratos
relacionales – Contratos colaborativos – Formas de contratos NEC – Asignación de los
contratos
Summary:
1. Introduction – 2. English law and good faith – 3. The instruction of relational contracts
4. The use of collaborative contracts in the construction industry – 5. Good faith in practice
– 6. Conclusions
Revista Derecho & Sociedad, N° 55 / pp. 33 - 51
FECHA DE RECEPCIÓN: 03/07/2020
FECHA DE APROBACIÓN: 05/11/2020
* Partner in Pinsent Masons LLP. Bachelor of Laws (LLP) and Master of Laws (LLM) (Cantab). MSc at King’s College London. Member
in FCIArb and FCInstCES. His practice covers project advice and dispute resolution, and he has advised on the UK and international
infrastructure projects under various construction standard forms of contract, including NEC, JCT, and FIDIC. ORCID: 0000-0002-8627-
7013. Contacto: shy.jackson@pinsentmasons.com
| Mecanismos Contractuales en Construcción |
34
Derecho & Sociedad
Asociación Civil
55
Revista Derecho & Sociedad, N° 55, Noviembre 2020 / ISSN 2079-3634
1. Introduction
Over the last decade, the topic of good faith has become the subject of increased debate in England. That
may seem odd to a civil law lawyer who is used to this concept and sees no diculty with its application,
but the position is quite dierent under English law. The background to this debate in England seems to be
a combination of a few factors that have come up at the same time.
In that regard, the construction sector has been encouraged to use collaborative contracts and the use of
such contracts, which include good faith type clauses, is now the norm in the UK. In addition, the leading
judgment in Yam Seng1 by Mr. Justice Leggatt, as he then was, put forward a forceful argument for the
adoption of good faith, which has been followed to some extent, most recently in the decision in Bates2
which highlighted the relevance of relational contracting. Separately, there has been increasing interaction
between civil law and common law lawyers, often as members of tribunals in international arbitration,
which has helped demonstrate how good faith principles can be applied in practice.
The purpose of this paper, however, is not to set out the full position under English law in relation to good
faith and how it has developed. Instead, this paper will provide a background to good faith by way of an
introduction but will highlight the recent developments in order to consider whether and to what extent
they aect construction contracts, as well as trying to put the principles of good faith in a practical context
by considering several scenarios. As will be discussed later, there is the narrow issue of whether good faith
gives rise to any enforceable obligations but also a wider issue as to whether it is in the interests of English
law to accept good faith as a concept for certain contracts and whether it can be used to encourage or
enforce certain collaborative behaviors that will lead to better outcomes.
Before looking at the detail, there are several preliminary observations which need to be made:
First, good faith is often described as a key dierence between common law and civil law systems. This
paper cannot cover the position in other jurisdictions in any detail but that has been covered extensively
by other commentators3 and it is correct that this principle is embedded in civil code systems and not
in the common law, but it is necessary to recognize that many common law systems have adopted
and recognized good faith as part of their jurisprudence. This is the case in the United States as well
as in Canada, where the Canadian Supreme Court in Bhasin v Hrynew4 decided to recognize good faith
contractual performance as a general organizing principle. In places such as Singapore5 and Australia,
the position is less clear but there seems to have been a greater willingness to consider whether and how
good faith may apply.
In addition, while civil law systems are often mentioned in any comparison, such a comparison has limited
value. As Mr. Justice Leggatt pointed out in Yam Seng, good faith in civil law systems is an overarching
policy-based principle that applies even before the contract comes into existence, while under English law
it is a duty anchored in the contract based on the parties’ intentions6.
Second, English law operates perfectly well without the concept of good faith. This is addressed below in
more detail, but English law has other principles that apply where other legal systems may rely on good
faith7. The popularity of the English legal system has not suered due to the absence of good faith and some
1 Yam Seng Pte Ltd v International Trade Corp Ltd (2013) EWHC 111 (QB).
2 Bates v Post Oce Ltd, N° 3 (2019) EWHC 606 (QB).
3 See for example Julian Bailey, “Comparing “good faith” in civil and common law systems” , Construction Law Journal (2019): 233, Kelda
Groves, “The doctrine of good faith in four legal systems” (1999) Construction Law Journal (2019): 265, Stefan Leupertz, “The Principle
of Good Faith in German Civil Law”, International construction law review (2016): 67, Peter Rosher, “Good Faith in Construction Contracts
under French Law and Some Comparative Observations with English Law” International construction law review (2015): 302, and Rupert
Jackson’s lecture which covers the position in numerous jurisdictions including China - Does Good Faith have any Role in Construction
Contracts? The Pinsent Masons Lecture, 22 November (Hong Kong,2017) now an SCL paper downloadable at www.scl.org.uk.
4 The Supreme Court held that “nding that there is a duty to perform contracts honestly will make the law more certain, more just and more
in tune with reasonable commercial expectations”. The Supreme Court referred to what it described as “enhanced attention to the notion
of good faith, mitigated by reluctance to embrace it as a stand-alone doctrine”. (2014): SCC 71 at paragraph 57.
5 See HSBC Institutional Trust Services (Singapore) Ltd v Toshin Development Singapore Pte Ltd (2012) SGCA where the Singaporean Court
of Appeal held that there was no good reason why an express agreement between contracting parties that they must negotiate in
good faith should not be upheld. See however the more recent decision, One Suites Pte Ltd v Pacic Motor Credit (Pte) Ltd (2015) SGCA
21, where the Singaporean Court of Appeal rejected the suggestion that good faith should be implied into commercial contract and
PH Hydraulics & Engineering Pte Ltd v Airtrust (Hong Kong) Ltd [2017] SGCA 26 where it was held it was possible to argue for an implied
duty of good faith but the court rejected an argument such a duty allows recovery of punitive damages.
6 But see Fuchs’ suggestion that a German court would enforce clause 3.5 in Mid Essex and would consider such deductions to be
excessive by looking at the underlying value (Dr Jur Sebastian Fuchs and Shy Jackson, “Good Faith: An Anglo-German Comparison”
International construction law review (2015): 404.
7 See Shy Jackson, “Good Faith in Construction – Will it make a dierence and is it worth the trouble?” Const L J 420 (2007) :23
Para continuar leyendo
Solicita tu prueba