Contracts and Public Policy - Essay Example

The courts have been very rigid throughout history when it comes to public policy. The rule is that ignorantia juris non excusat (ignorance of the law is no excuse). Therefore, the courts simply reject any arguments that any of the parties did not know the relevant law and broke it unintentionally.
The strictness has been sometimes observed as being responsible for the making of potentially abrupt decisions. As a principle, the decisions of the courts must be impartial and objectivity must be given the utmost importance. Fact that the individual preferences of judges have a great impact on judgments of singular cases, the contracts that are allegedly against public policy are often adjudicated too hastily.

I think that if the involvement of personal preferences of the judiciary is inevitable, the decisions must be made fairly. The courts are the epitome of the achievement of justice through objective and neutral analysis. There is a certain possibility that individual preferences may prevail over all other principles and ethics because the judiciary is made up of human beings. Human errors may lead to faulty and unfair decisions and that should not be considered as the failure of law. The judiciary, however, should not be influenced by individual preferences because this would tend to be at the cost of neutrality and if neutrality is given up then the general public might lose its faith in the courts.

If that is indeed a fact that the individual preferences of judges are involved then it is very important that what influences those preferences. As a judge, a decision must be reached after careful and objective examination of circumstances. Each and every observation must be free from bias. If a decision is reached after following the principles of objectivity and neutrality, it is deemed to be a fair decision.

In the case of contracts made against public policy, the same principles must be followed with reasonable diligence. It is true that such contracts make cases in which the individual preferences of judges are involved more than they are in other cases. But the establishment of the fact that what is the public policy in question and in what way it is being broken or what law is being misfeased, should be examined with due care. Such contracts, if proved to be of the nature as they are alleged to be as above, must not be approved or awarded but reaching the decision that these contracts are, in fact, against the public policy should be made carefully because it is the pivotal factor and is of paramount importance.