Abstract

In the light of the communicative action theory and the discourse ethics, an attempt is made to show that the maxim consisting of taking unrestricted responsibility for the consequences derived from an agreement reached in conditions of procedural justice has been thematized and that it is probable, if no longer a fact, that his claim of normative correctness is rejected or at least rectified in the practical discourse of jurists. The work takes as a reference the content control of non-negotiated clauses, reviewing the existing panorama in various legal systems, its hold on rules and principles of civil law and the resignification that this has caused regarding the rules of default law. It is postulated that the rules of default law protect a minimum of substantive justice and that the parties cannot move away from them without a reasonable justification.

Keywords

communicative reason discourse justice law of contracts content control of non-negotiated clauses