Unilateral variation clauses in Platform-User agreements

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningfagfællebedømt

Standard

Unilateral variation clauses in Platform-User agreements. / Hansen, Ole; Ritchie, Hamish George.

I: European Review of Private Law, Bind 30, Nr. 6, 2022, s. 929-950.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningfagfællebedømt

Harvard

Hansen, O & Ritchie, HG 2022, 'Unilateral variation clauses in Platform-User agreements', European Review of Private Law, bind 30, nr. 6, s. 929-950.

APA

Hansen, O., & Ritchie, H. G. (2022). Unilateral variation clauses in Platform-User agreements. European Review of Private Law, 30(6), 929-950.

Vancouver

Hansen O, Ritchie HG. Unilateral variation clauses in Platform-User agreements. European Review of Private Law. 2022;30(6):929-950.

Author

Hansen, Ole ; Ritchie, Hamish George. / Unilateral variation clauses in Platform-User agreements. I: European Review of Private Law. 2022 ; Bind 30, Nr. 6. s. 929-950.

Bibtex

@article{54bf4de69f5c4b54a947b5b5bd2c9302,
title = "Unilateral variation clauses in Platform-User agreements",
abstract = "Platform-user agreements generally seek to regulate long-term relationships in a highly detailed manner, whilst retaining the operator{\textquoteright}s commercial capacity to maintain and develop the Platform. Accordingly, unilateral variation clauses are core elements of the private governance of platform ecosystems. Whilst the contemporary growth of diversity in platform structures can manifest in more diverse user terms, e.g. in integrated or collaborative platforms, the core capacity to steer the contractual relationship generally remains with the operator. This is arguably necessary for the business efficacy of digital platforms in an increasingly complex legal and economic landscape. However, despite their prevalence, such terms remain a borderline feature of contract law, challenging doctrinal conceptions of contract as a static, bilateral consensus and raising questions of validity and interpretation. Invalidity is only likely where terms breach explicit regulatory standards, or provide an imbalance that is unconscionable or unfair under established contractual doctrine. Whilst regulatory protections exist for some users at an EU level, these remain relatively formalistic and limited in scope. Nonetheless, validity does not imply unlimited use of unilateral variation clauses. Contractual interpretation is influenced by the regulatory framework, which imposes systemic expectations of general business conduct in digital markets, establishing standards of objectivity and appropriateness. In non-intermediary platform settings, where regulatory protection is more limited, interpretation inspired by principles of administrative law and derived from the nature and purpose of the contract may restrict the operator{\textquoteright}s discretion. Though not unfamiliar to contemporary contract law, such standards are complex and outcomes will rely heavily on specific circumstances.",
keywords = "Faculty of Law, Contract law, Private governance, Validity, Interpretation, Platforms, User terms, variation, standard terms, digital contracts",
author = "Ole Hansen and Ritchie, {Hamish George}",
year = "2022",
language = "English",
volume = "30",
pages = "929--950",
journal = "European Review of Private Law",
issn = "0928-9801",
publisher = "Kluwer Law International",
number = "6",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Unilateral variation clauses in Platform-User agreements

AU - Hansen, Ole

AU - Ritchie, Hamish George

PY - 2022

Y1 - 2022

N2 - Platform-user agreements generally seek to regulate long-term relationships in a highly detailed manner, whilst retaining the operator’s commercial capacity to maintain and develop the Platform. Accordingly, unilateral variation clauses are core elements of the private governance of platform ecosystems. Whilst the contemporary growth of diversity in platform structures can manifest in more diverse user terms, e.g. in integrated or collaborative platforms, the core capacity to steer the contractual relationship generally remains with the operator. This is arguably necessary for the business efficacy of digital platforms in an increasingly complex legal and economic landscape. However, despite their prevalence, such terms remain a borderline feature of contract law, challenging doctrinal conceptions of contract as a static, bilateral consensus and raising questions of validity and interpretation. Invalidity is only likely where terms breach explicit regulatory standards, or provide an imbalance that is unconscionable or unfair under established contractual doctrine. Whilst regulatory protections exist for some users at an EU level, these remain relatively formalistic and limited in scope. Nonetheless, validity does not imply unlimited use of unilateral variation clauses. Contractual interpretation is influenced by the regulatory framework, which imposes systemic expectations of general business conduct in digital markets, establishing standards of objectivity and appropriateness. In non-intermediary platform settings, where regulatory protection is more limited, interpretation inspired by principles of administrative law and derived from the nature and purpose of the contract may restrict the operator’s discretion. Though not unfamiliar to contemporary contract law, such standards are complex and outcomes will rely heavily on specific circumstances.

AB - Platform-user agreements generally seek to regulate long-term relationships in a highly detailed manner, whilst retaining the operator’s commercial capacity to maintain and develop the Platform. Accordingly, unilateral variation clauses are core elements of the private governance of platform ecosystems. Whilst the contemporary growth of diversity in platform structures can manifest in more diverse user terms, e.g. in integrated or collaborative platforms, the core capacity to steer the contractual relationship generally remains with the operator. This is arguably necessary for the business efficacy of digital platforms in an increasingly complex legal and economic landscape. However, despite their prevalence, such terms remain a borderline feature of contract law, challenging doctrinal conceptions of contract as a static, bilateral consensus and raising questions of validity and interpretation. Invalidity is only likely where terms breach explicit regulatory standards, or provide an imbalance that is unconscionable or unfair under established contractual doctrine. Whilst regulatory protections exist for some users at an EU level, these remain relatively formalistic and limited in scope. Nonetheless, validity does not imply unlimited use of unilateral variation clauses. Contractual interpretation is influenced by the regulatory framework, which imposes systemic expectations of general business conduct in digital markets, establishing standards of objectivity and appropriateness. In non-intermediary platform settings, where regulatory protection is more limited, interpretation inspired by principles of administrative law and derived from the nature and purpose of the contract may restrict the operator’s discretion. Though not unfamiliar to contemporary contract law, such standards are complex and outcomes will rely heavily on specific circumstances.

KW - Faculty of Law

KW - Contract law

KW - Private governance

KW - Validity

KW - Interpretation

KW - Platforms

KW - User terms

KW - variation

KW - standard terms

KW - digital contracts

M3 - Journal article

VL - 30

SP - 929

EP - 950

JO - European Review of Private Law

JF - European Review of Private Law

SN - 0928-9801

IS - 6

ER -

ID: 312767149