The Concept of Non-Contractual Obligations

§ 311 BGB) and in other countries.
28
Accordingly, liability for pre-contractual fault 
has also been included in the 
Principles of European Contract Law
(PECL).
29
Of 
course, the PECL do not cover classical tort cases of damage to property and bodily 
injury. But even such cases may lead to contractual liability under German law if 
the wrongful action was committed in the context of a contract or a business 
relationship (§§ 241 (2), 280 (1) BGB).
30
Are these observations not clear 
indications of the fact that a distinction between contractual and non-contractual 
obligations can only be a pragmatic device, that there is no such distinction in 
reality, and that it should not be made the basis of European private law? 
Nobody doubts that doctrinal distinctions within the law are constructions of 
the human mind; they do not correspond to an objective reality existing 
independently of legal discourse.
31
Nevertheless, such distinctions may be more or 
less helpful and they may find divergent degrees of consensus from a comparative 
perspective. The distinction between voluntary (or contractual) and non-voluntary 
(or non-contractual) obligations can be found in all European legal systems. It can 
be traced back to Roman law
32
and even to the philosophy of Aristotle.
33
More 
importantly, perhaps, the distinction is based on principle: even if it is doubtful 
whether contract law is or should be based on the principles of autonomy and free 
bargaining alone, contracts are legal instruments for voluntarily exchanging goods 
and services.
34
Non-contractual obligations, in contrast, are the consequence of non-
voluntary events – unwanted at least from the claimant‟s perspective; and they arise 
independently of a contractual relation. Hence, they must ultimately be based on the 
protection of rights and interests that are independent of a contractual promise. 
At the same time, there is a very simple explanation for the fact that this 
distinction may appear blurred on a closer look at the specific legal systems of 
Europe: the development of the law is not always determined by a principle of 
conceptual neatness. This is nicely shown by the peculiarly broad conception of 
contractual liability under German law. Practising lawyers and especially judges are 
25
Von Bar
(fn 2) vol I [3]; 
J Cartwright/M Hesselink
(eds), Precontractual Liability in European 
Private Law (2008).