Freedom of Contract is a fundamental concept that permits parties to negotiate their agreements freely. However, this freedom must be balanced with the necessity to protect consumers and small businesses from unfair practices. This article discusses the challenges faced in achieving this balance and proposes recommendations for improvement.
What is Freedom of Contract?
Freedom of Contract is a legal principle that gives contracting parties the liberty to negotiate the terms of their agreements freely. This freedom is a component of a liberal constitutional state and is a crucial principle of civil law. It’s protected by constitutional law in many countries. It is different from general prohibitions such as unlawfulness and immorality.
Benefits of Freedom of Contract
Freedom of Contract strengthens the ability of parties to pursue their interests and self-regulate their relationships. It allows them to negotiate terms that best suit their needs and desires. Freedom of Contract has a direct impact on the economy by allowing parties to negotiate and agree on contract terms, thereby increasing market efficiency and boosting the economy.
Economic Impact of Freedom of Contract
Freedom of Contract promotes competition, as companies have to compete for customers and make attractive offers to stand their ground against competitors. This results in improved product quality and falling price levels, benefiting consumers. At an international level, it allows companies to expand their sales markets and increase profits, resulting in increased prosperity and strengthening of the economy as a whole.
Limitations of Freedom of Contract
While Freedom of Contract comes with many advantages, it also has some limitations. For instance, it cannot be used to circumvent laws that prohibit or restrict certain types of contracts. The principle of freedom from arbitrariness states that one party may not use a contract in an unreasonable manner to disadvantage the other party. Thus, freedom from arbitrariness is a limitation on freedom from contracts and guarantees that parties act fairly and reasonably.
Unfair Contract Terms
Unfair Contract Terms (UCTs) are a significant issue in the application of Freedom of Contract. UCTs often assign contract risks to the party that is least equipped to manage them. Small businesses are particularly vulnerable to UCTs as they often lack the bargaining power, time, and expertise to negotiate or assess all standard form contracts for potential UCTs.
The Role of Regulators in Controlling UCTs
Regulators play a crucial role in controlling the prevalence of UCTs in standard form contracts. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), for instance, is responsible for enforcing and promoting compliance with the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) (CCA), which includes the Australia Consumer Law (ACL) that contains the UCT provisions.
The ACCC has been the main ACL regulator enforcing compliance with the unfair contract terms law. However, the ACCC’s resources are limited, and the current UCT regime poses significant problems from the perspective of both business compliance and ACCC resourcing.
Recommendations for Improvement
Making UCT a Violation of ACL
To tackle the limitations of the current regime, one recommendation is to make the inclusion of a UCT in a standard form contract a violation of the ACL, subject to civil pecuniary penalties and other remedial orders. This would give businesses a stronger incentive to ensure their contracts are fair, thereby enhancing the effectiveness of the UCT provisions.
More Flexible Remedies for Unfair Terms
Another recommendation is to make more flexible remedies available when a court determines that a term in a standard form contract is unfair. For example, the ACL could be amended to allow the court to order remedies such as contract variations, which could lead to more flexible and mutually beneficial outcomes than voiding the term or contract as a whole.
Reconsidering the Threshold Requirements for UCT Provisions
The threshold requirements for the UCT provisions should also be reconsidered. A clearer and more effective threshold would be to apply the UCT regime to standard form contracts entered into by businesses with less than $10 million annual turnover. This would cover more businesses that operate in labour-intensive, low-revenue industries.
Conclusion
Striking the right balance between Freedom of Contract and Consumer Protection is a complex task that requires constant review and adaptation. While Freedom of Contract is a fundamental principle that boosts economic growth and competitiveness, it must not be at the expense of consumer protection. Therefore, it’s crucial to implement measures that ensure this balance, such as making UCT a violation of the ACL, providing more flexible remedies for unfair terms, and reconsidering the threshold requirements for UCT provisions. These steps, combined with the continued vigilance of regulators like the ACCC, can help ensure that the scales are evenly balanced between Freedom of Contract and Consumer Protection.
Tagged in: Australian consumer law, Competition And Consumer Act 2010, consumer protection laws, Freedom of Contract