Bibliographie sélective OHADA

Does anything remain after the end of a contract? The most natural answer would be to say that nothing remains, except an elusive memory and a coming back to freedom. This reaction is directly fed by the fact that the general theory of contracts does not explicitly take account of the extinction sequels. Generally, we easily believe that the relationship between economic partners and the duration of their contract stop at the same time. But this belief is built on a simplistic vision of the real economic world. When the contract duration is over, some economic interest must be preserved. That is why wise partners anticipate a follow-up to the extinguished contract, by stipulating postcontractual obligations. But, even if there is no anticipation, a regulation does exist with standard legal rules or judges’ framework. A real optimization of the contract law is expanding, to maximize the benefits arising from the contractual experience and minimize the risks led by the postcontractual freedom. That is how the Contract shows a specific aspect: it becomes a social institution which considers its economic context, serving the relational dimension of the partnership. Definitely, the relationship between the partners can last above the duration of the contractual instrument. By this way, the post-contract put into perspective the contract in an existential addition which is composed of three parts: the precontractual, the execution and the postcontractual time periods. In this configuration, the term is seen as a mark which encloses a duration (temporal criterion) and turns the contractual obligation (substantial criterion). Indeed, the post-contract nature is dual, contractual and extracontractual at the same time. That is why we will treat our subject from both and complementary criterions, saying that the post-contract is a time period out of the contract, whereas it shows concurrently the contract out of its own duration.