already found a solution to a specific legal problem, it would after all be inefficient not to benefit from it in one s own Watson calls this phenomenon the most important factor in legal development most changes in most systems are the result of borrowing. The similarities that already exist among many legal systems are for the most part the result of legal transplanting. Untill the nineteenth century, they predominantly took place within Europe, where they resulted in the already mentioned ius commune of the 17th and 18th century, but subsequently legal transplants took place between European countries and(predominantly) the United States and Japan. There is an abundance of examples in private law: apart from the modern instruments of commercial law and finance, mainly imported from the United States, whose original English denotations, such as trust, swaps, franchising and sale and lease back, have been preserved in continental Europe, there is a multitude of classic private-law concepts which became law by reception. From the post-war period, the distinction between an obligation de resultat (full performance)and an obligation de moyens(substantial performance)developed in belgian law. was. or instance. received into the netherlands and france strict liability for defective products is based on the relevant American doctrine; the Dutch rules on unfair contract terms were inspired by the German AGB Gesetz, past few years, Dutch law has served as a source of inspiration for the new Civil Codes of theso for my argumentation it is interesting at this point to determine what exactly ner East-Block countries brings about the reception of foreign ideas and legal rules: why does reception take place? Prestige, which, incidentally, is not much more than the quality of the rule, and the power wielded by a particular country are, of course, factors. For instance, the prestigious German Pandektemvissenschaff greatly influenced not only the continental systems, but also English law, and even, be it indirectly, American law. Pollock and Maitland considered themselves followers of Von Savigny. In the past few decades, the reverse occurs. Transplants now mostly flow into the other direction, Europe deriving benefit from American law .39 Under the influence of the Law and Economics-movement, a tendency has grown, however, to seek the reason for a transplant in economic efficiency. Only efficient rules are allegedly transplanted. Mattei regards the reception of legal rules, for 243f Legal transplan See on this F.J. M. Feldbrugge, 'Het nieuwe Burgerlijk Wetboek van de russische Federatie Rechtsgeleerd Magazin Themis 1997, at 43 ff, and Jan M. Smits, Systems Mixing and in Transition: Import and Export of Legal Models: the Dutch Experience, in E.H. Hondius(ed ) Netherlands Reports to the Fifteenth International Congress of Comparative La (Antwerpen/Groningen, 1998), 47 ff. See Michael H. Hoeflich, ' Savigny and his Anglo-American Disciples, 37 American Journal of Comparative Law(1989),17 ff and Mathias Reimann(ed ) The Reception of Continentai Ideas in the Common Law World 1820-1920, (Berlin, 1993) Ugo Mattei, Why the Wind Changed: Intellectual Leadership in Western Law, 42 American Journal of Comparative Law(1994), 199: Europe is now a"follower See, in particular, Ugo Mattei, ' Efficiency in Legal Transplants: An Essay in Comparative Law and Economics, 14 International Review of Law and Economics, (1994), 3 ff. Error! bookmark not definedError! Bookmark not defined. already found a solution to a specific legal problem, it would after all be inefficient not to benefit from it in one's own. Watson calls this phenomenon the most important factor in legal development: `most changes in most systems are the result of borrowing.'36 The similarities that already exist among many legal systems are for the most part the result of legal transplanting. Untill the nineteenth century, they predominantly took place within Europe, where they resulted in the already mentioned ius commune of the 17th and 18th century, but subsequently legal transplants took place between European countries and (predominantly) the United States and Japan. There is an abundance of examples in private law: apart from the modern instruments of commercial law and finance, mainly imported from the United States, whose original English denotations, such as `trust', `swaps', `franchising' and `sale and lease back', have been preserved in continental Europe, there is a multitude of `classic' private-law concepts which became law by reception. From the post-war period, the distinction between an obligation de résultat (full performance) and an obligation de moyens (`substantial' performance) developed in Belgian law, was, or instance, received into the Netherlands and France; strict liability for defective products is based on the relevant American doctrine; the Dutch rules on unfair contract terms were inspired by the German AGB Gesetz; in the past few years, Dutch law has served as a source of inspiration for the new Civil Codes of the former East-Block countries.37 For my argumentation it is interesting at this point to determine what exactly brings about the reception of foreign ideas and legal rules: why does reception take place? Prestige, which, incidentally, is not much more than the quality of the rule, and the power wielded by a particular country are, of course, factors. For instance, the prestigious German Pandektenwissenschaft greatly influenced not only the continental systems, but also English law, and even, be it indirectly, American law. Pollock and Maitland considered themselves followers of Von Savigny.38 In the past few decades, the reverse occurs. Transplants now mostly flow into the other direction, Europe deriving benefit from American law.39 Under the influence of the Law and Economics-movement, a tendency has grown, however, to seek the reason for a transplant in economic efficiency.40 Only efficient rules are allegedly transplanted. Mattei regards the reception of legal rules, for 243 ff. 36 Legal Transplants, at 94. 37 See on this F.J.M. Feldbrugge, `Het nieuwe Burgerlijk Wetboek van de Russische Federatie', Rechtsgeleerd Magazijn Themis 1997, at 43 ff, and Jan M. Smits, Systems Mixing and in Transition: Import and Export of Legal Models: the Dutch Experience, in E.H. Hondius (ed.), Netherlands Reports to the Fifteenth International Congress of Comparative Law (Antwerpen/Groningen, 1998), 47 ff. 38 See Michael H. Hoeflich, `Savigny and his Anglo-American Disciples', 37 American Journal of Comparative Law (1989), 17 ff. and Mathias Reimann (ed.), The Reception of Continental Ideas in the Common Law World 1820-1920, (Berlin, 1993). 39 Ugo Mattei, `Why the Wind Changed: Intellectual Leadership in Western Law', 42 American Journal of Comparative Law (1994), 199: Europe is now a "follower". 40 See, in particular, Ugo Mattei, `Efficiency in Legal Transplants: An Essay in Comparative Law and Economics', 14 International Review of Law and Economics, (1994), 3 ff