law knew only five grounds for the reduction of a contract -incapacity, force and fear, ain facility and circumvention, fraud and error. 35 Eleven years later, the same judge preside the court which borrowed a sixth ground from English law, namely undue influence. 30 Similarly, challenges to contracts based on the originally English doctrine of misrepresentation gained ground in Scotland in the latter part of the nineteenth century, overlapping confusingly with the established rules of error, 37 while fraud was significantly narrowed down by acceptance of the English doctrine laid down by the House of lords in 1889 in Derry v Peek. 38 The factors underlying this reception of English law in the nineteenth century, which can be parallelled in areas of the law other than contract, have often been discussed, and were most likely multiple: as already mentioned, they probably included a common language, ready material. and the existence of a common appeal court in the House of Lords. In additio G access to sources and texts of English law contrasting with a relative paucity of indigent there may well have been a judicial perception that the unified commerce and increasingly unified culture of a great imperial nation required at the least a harmonised or common approach to legal issues. 39 A further possibility which has not yet received the attention it probably deserves is the influence, or even reception, of Civilian concepts and thinking in nineteenth-century English law, 40 which may have made it seem more intelligible to lawyers brought up in another tradition altogether Legislation, from Westminster since the 1707 Union and from Brussels since 1973, has also been a factor in the convergence of Scots and English contract laws, although mainly at the evel of particular contracts such as sale of goods. In many areas of legislation, in particular those associated with commerce, employment, welfare and taxation, it is increasingly difficult to see any specifically Scottish dimension, and it is possible to talk properly of United Kingdom law, or indeed European Community law. But in the trad itional areas of private law, legislation has in recent times often contributed to the continuation of a distinct Scottish dimension. This can be attributed largely to the existence since 1965 of the Scottish Law Commission, which has greatly improved Scottish legislation in private law. The Commission works by detailed research on Scots law and the comparative position, wide consultation and the presentation of generally well argued reports and draft bills In contract law, the Commission has been responsible for the modernisation of the rules on requirements of writing l the undoing of the parole evidence rule, another piece of 3STennent v Tennent's Trs(1868)6M840 at 876 per Lord President Inglis. Facility and circumvention is really a sub-category of fraud. Compare with the Inglis list the classical Civilian grounds of invalidity: incapacity, violence. fraud and error. Note also Pecl. Arts 4.103-4 108 36Gray v Binny (1879)7R 332 McBryde, pp 187-203 38(1889)14 App Cas337; McBryde,pp.207-209 39A recent discussion is A F Rodger, Thinking about Scots law,(1996)1 ELR 1 OSee e.g. AW Simpson, Innovation in nineteenth-century contract law,(1975)91 LQR 247-278 4 Requirements of Writing(Scotland) Act 1995. For the background see Report on Requirements of Writing (Scot Law Com No 112, 1988)law knew only five grounds for the reduction of a contract - incapacity, force and fear, facility and circumvention, fraud and error.35 Eleven years later, the same judge presided in the court which borrowed a sixth ground from English law, namely undue influence.36 Similarly, challenges to contracts based on the originally English doctrine of misrepresentation gained ground in Scotland in the latter part of the nineteenth century, overlapping confusingly with the established rules of error,37 while fraud was significantly narrowed down by acceptance of the English doctrine laid down by the House of Lords in 1889 in Derry v Peek. 38 The factors underlying this reception of English law in the nineteenth century, which can be parallelled in areas of the law other than contract, have often been discussed, and were most likely multiple: as already mentioned, they probably included a common language, ready access to sources and texts of English law contrasting with a relative paucity of indigenous material, and the existence of a common appeal court in the House of Lords. In addition, there may well have been a judicial perception that the unified commerce and increasingly unified culture of a great imperial nation required at the least a harmonised or common approach to legal issues.39 A further possibility which has not yet received the attention it probably deserves is the influence, or even reception, of Civilian concepts and thinking in nineteenth-century English law,40 which may have made it seem more intelligible to lawyers brought up in another tradition altogether. Legislation, from Westminster since the 1707 Union and from Brussels since 1973, has also been a factor in the convergence of Scots and English contract laws, although mainly at the level of particular contracts such as sale of goods. In many areas of legislation, in particular those associated with commerce, employment, welfare and taxation, it is increasingly difficult to see any specifically Scottish dimension, and it is possible to talk properly of United Kingdom law, or indeed European Community law. But in the traditional areas of private law, legislation has in recent times often contributed to the continuation of a distinct Scottish dimension. This can be attributed largely to the existence since 1965 of the Scottish Law Commission, which has greatly improved Scottish legislation in private law. The Commission works by detailed research on Scots law and the comparative position, wide consultation and the presentation of generally well argued reports and draft Bills. In contract law, the Commission has been responsible for the modernisation of the rules on requirements of writing;41 the undoing of the parole evidence rule, another piece of 35Tennent v Tennent’s Trs (1868) 6 M 840 at 876 per Lord President Inglis. Facility and circumvention is really a sub-category of fraud. Compare with the Inglis list the classical Civilian grounds of invalidity: incapacity, violence, fraud and error. Note also PECL, Arts 4.103-4.108. 36Gray v Binny (1879) 7 R 332. 37McBryde, pp. 187-203. 38(1889) 14 App Cas 337; McBryde, pp. 207-209. 39A recent discussion is A F Rodger, ‘Thinking about Scots law’, (1996) 1 ELR 1. 40See e.g. A W B Simpson, ‘Innovation in nineteenth-century contract law’, (1975) 91 LQR 247-278. 41Requirements of Writing (Scotland) Act 1995. For the background see Report on Requirements of Writing (Scot Law Com No 112, 1988)