Contract and promising: A reappraisal of the moral foundations of contract law

Abstract

This article reappraises the moral foundations of contract law by questioning the sufficiency of monolithic theories grounded exclusively in promissory morality or economic instrumentalism. Drawing on doctrinal analysis, normative theory, and the method of reflective equilibrium, it examines a purposive sample of leading appellate and supreme court decisions in common law jurisdictions between 2020 and 2024, alongside selected landmark authorities. The analysis suggests that contemporary adjudication often reflects an implicit pluralism, balancing autonomy, reliance, efficiency, fairness, and institutional legitimacy rather than relying on a single justificatory logic. This pattern is particularly visible in disputes involving digital standard-form agreements, algorithmic contracting, and marked asymmetries of bargaining power. The article develops a pluralist and context-sensitive framework that integrates moral, economic, and relational rationales into a structured adjudicative methodology. It concludes that contract law is best understood as a dynamic institutional framework capable of reconciling principle with pragmatism in contracting environments shaped by digital intermediation and institutional complexity.