Freedom of Contract in the EU and China
In modern contract law, freedom of contract is of an underlying principle that people have struggled for centuries. Both China and Europe fully realized its value, although in distinct ways that are deeply rooted in the two regionsâ€™ historical and cultural backgrounds. In Europe, freedom of contract is restricted by principles of good faith, fair dealing, social justice and fundamental rights, whereas in China, except for those limitations set by the Europe, the traditional notion of contract voluntariness is rather limited by the collective interests and interests of the state. This paper is intending to describe the different understandings of freedom of contract in the EU and China.
The European Civil Code: The Way Forward
1. Civil society and political union 2. The Acquis Communautaire in private law 3. The hidden code 4. Private law and the economic constitution 5. Cultural diversity and European identity 6. Respecting legal diversity 7. Multi-level private law 8. Strengthening convergence 9. Exploring the European social model.
The Area of Freedom, Security and Justice ten years on: Successes and future challenges under the Stockholm Programme. CEPS Paperbacks. June 2010
This book celebrates the tenth anniversary of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ) by bringing together the views of key practitioners and policy-makers who have played an outstanding role in thinking about and shaping EU policies on freedom, security and justice. 
 
Ten years ago, the member states transferred competences to the EU for law and policy-making in the fields of immigration, asylum and border controls, and began the transfer process for criminal justice and policing. This decade of European cooperation on AFSJ policies has experienced very dynamic convergence, the enactment of a large body of European law and the setting-up of numerous EU agencies working in these domains. Such dynamism in policy-making has not been without challenges and vulnerabilities, however. As this collective volume shows, the main dilemmas that lie ahead relate to an effective (while more plural) institutional framework under the Treaty of Lisbon, stronger judicial scrutiny through a greater role for national courts and the Court of Justice in Luxembourg, better mechanisms for evaluating and monitoring the implementation of EU AFSJ law and a more solid fundamental rights strategy. The contributions in this volume address the progress achieved so far in these policy areas, identify the challenges for future European cooperation in the AFSJ and put forward possible paths for making more progress in the next generation of the EU’s AFSJ.