Marital Contracts on the Fault Lines: A Liberal Inquiry

Abstract The revolution in Western family law over the past 50 years—often described as ‘liberalization’—involves a decrease in the importance of fault-based factors alongside an increase in the significance of marital contracts. While these two trends generally complement each other, they may conflict when a couple seeks to assign economic consequences to sexual fault through a contract. Should such an agreement be legally enforceable? Which aligns more with a ‘true liberal’ perspective: advocating against fault or for the use of contracts? This paper suggests a new approach that goes beyond simply determining which trend should prevail. We illustrate how the perceived conflict between proponents of sexual liberalization and proponents of contractual liberalization could be resolved by identifying the underlying reasons that motivate each ‘camp’, proposing potential legal mechanisms and specific legal contexts in which broad agreement might be reached, and explicating the multidimensionality of family law liberalization.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence
Published
2024-10-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/cjlj.2024.19
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Conflict of Laws and Jurisdiction
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.23

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Marital Contracts on the Fault Lines: A Liberal Inquiry

Ram Rivlin, Shahar Lifshitz
1 citations
Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence
Conflict of Laws and Jurisdiction
2.23
article

Marital Contracts on the Fault Lines: A Liberal Inquiry

Ram Rivlin, Shahar Lifshitz
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract The revolution in Western family law over the past 50 years—often described as ‘liberalization’—involves a decrease in the importance of fault-based factors alongside an increase in the significance of marital contracts. While these two trends generally complement each other, they may conflict when a couple seeks to assign economic consequences to sexual fault through a contract. Should such an agreement be legally enforceable? Which aligns more with a ‘true liberal’ perspective: advocating against fault or for the use of contracts? This paper suggests a new approach that goes beyond simply determining which trend should prevail. We illustrate how the perceived conflict between proponents of sexual liberalization and proponents of contractual liberalization could be resolved by identifying the underlying reasons that motivate each ‘camp’, proposing potential legal mechanisms and specific legal contexts in which broad agreement might be reached, and explicating the multidimensionality of family law liberalization.

Canadian Journal of Law & JurisprudenceVol. 38(1)
Bar-Ilan University (IL), Hebrew University of Jerusalem (IL)
McGill University, Bar-Ilan University, Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Conflict of Laws and Jurisdiction
2.23
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.