The article argues that the fetters on the exercise of unilateral contractual discretionary powers that were defined in Braganza v BP Shipping Ltd and the limits on damages clauses as redefined in Cavendish Square Holding BV v Talal El Makdessi are imposed to prevent the abuse of contractual rights or freedoms and this is suggestive that a broader principle against the abuse of rights might be at work in English contract law. Whilst English law has traditionally been understood as rejecting a free-standing and general doctrine of abuse of rights, the article explains why this should not be regarded as an obstacle to the proposed analysis. In both the context of contractual discretion and damages clauses, the central importance of abuse is evident from the tests that are applied, the factors that the authorities tell us are relevant to their application and both the high bar for the court to intervene and the flexibility of the relevant standards, which filter out only the most egregious and inadmissible cases.

中文翻译：

---

英国合同法中的权利滥用：隐而不见？

文章辩称，行使Braganza v BP Shipping Ltd 一案中定义的单方面合同自由裁量权的束缚以及Cavendish Square Holding BV v Talal El Makdessi案中重新定义的损害赔偿条款限制强制执行以防止滥用合同权利或自由，这表明英国合同法中可能有更广泛的禁止滥用权利的原则。虽然传统上英国法被理解为拒绝滥用权利的独立和一般学说，但本文解释了为什么这不应被视为拟议分析的障碍。在合同自由裁量权和损害赔偿条款的背景下，滥用的核心重要性从所应用的测试、当局告诉我们与其应用相关的因素以及法院干预的高门槛和灵活性中可见一斑。的相关标准，只过滤掉最恶劣和不可接受的案件。