In the context of a study made within the framework of the Trento group known as the ‘common core of European private law’, the first question that needs to be answered is whether there is a common core in the area of mistake, duties to inform and fraud in European contract law, the object of our enquiry. In order to provide an answer we must first look at the empirical results of our study. At the same time we will bear in mind a second critical methodological question, namely what we mean by a ‘common core’.

At the outset we stated that one of our objectives was to investigate the reality of the civil law/common law divide. Taking stock empirically of our answers enables us therefore to assess the facts. The reply is of course highly complex and neither black nor white. First, is it true that there are no differences between common law and civil law countries, hence is there a common core? We are not able to reply affirmatively without qualification. Second, if there are differences, we have shown that they do not necessarily arise where expected. Does it follow that there is no common core? The answer will depend to some extent on the meaning given to ‘common core’.

A quantitative criterion, namely that a majority, as opposed to unanimity, suffices to constitute a common core, has been adopted.