This paper provides an overview of Norwegian contract law as part of the broader Scandinavian legal family, which blends elements of Anglo-American and continental legal traditions. It examines how unified contract codes emerged in Scandinavia in the early twentieth century and how Norwegian law differs from American contract law in key respects, including the absence of boilerplate clauses and the rejection of rigid theoretical frameworks. The paper highlights the influence of "legal realism" on Scandinavian jurisprudence, emphasizing justice over strict textual interpretation and informative rather than adversarial judicial proceedings.
Norwegian contract law is considered part of the Scandinavian legal family, a legal tradition that incorporates elements of both Anglo-American and continental legal theory. Unified codes regarding contracts have been enacted in Scandinavia since the end of the nineteenth century — for example, the Law of Contracts of 1918 — although legal stipulations regarding contractual elements are not as specific as in the United States and are left more open to judicial interpretation. Some legal scholars classify the entire Scandinavian legal system as a subgroup of continental law, while others argue it must be placed between the two systems. Regardless of classification, justice toward all parties is considered more important than the letter of the contract in the Scandinavian interpretive tradition. Like the continental system, judicial proceedings regarding disputes are informative rather than adversarial (Lillebakken, 1997).
A number of differences exist between the Norwegian contract law system and the American system. For example, the American system commonly features typical "boilerplate" clauses such as "no oral agreements" provisions, which stipulate that any changes to the contract must be made in writing. Norwegian contract law has no equivalent stipulation. Similarly, American contracts frequently include "interpretation" clauses that specify how an agreement is to be construed, as well as letters of intent containing non-binding agreements. Norwegian contract law contains no comparable standard instruments for these purposes (University Law School, 2005).
Characteristic of the Norwegian legal tradition in the twentieth century — as for the rest of Scandinavia — is the so-called "legal realism," which has emphasized considerations of justice in legal reasoning. Conceptualism and integrated theoretical systems have never been prominent in Scandinavia. In other words, there is no attempt to create a unified theory of contract law; rather, disputes are handled on a case-by-case basis, with considerable faith placed in the practices of judges to administer and dispense justice. Scandinavian legal culture thus prioritizes equitable outcomes and pragmatic judicial discretion over rigid doctrinal frameworks (Lillebakken, 1997).
Lillebakken, Frode. "Norway: ECTS 1996/97." University Law School. 1996.
"Justice-centered approach over rigid theory"
You’re 92% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 1 section.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.