The case studies included in this volume have been prepared on the basis of a questionnaire, according to the consolidated methodology of the project “The Common Core of European Private Law”. In drafting most of the fictitious disputes, we have drawn inspiration from real litigations adjudicated by courts. We have not only simplified the facts of these real litigations, but also slightly changed them by adding several fictional elements. The names of the parties are purely the product of our fantasy. The questionnaire consists of the following cases.

CASE 1: SEX WORK CONTRACTS

Mr Bighead, a famous sportsman, agreed with Miss Butterfly, a known sex worker, that he would pay her €10,000 for her services. After the contract was performed, Mr Bighead declared that he is not going to pay her anything. Can Miss Butterfly recover the amount promised to her?

CASE 2: CONTRACTS PROMOTING SEX WORK

Mr Pioneer rented out his limousine to Miss Pearl, a known sex worker, on a month-to-month basis for €2,000. After the first month, Mr Pioneer's employees, who are responsible for the maintenance of the vehicle, informed him that they have come across evidence which suggests that the vehicle is being used for the purposes of Miss Pearl's profession. Six months have since lapsed and Miss Pearl failed to pay last month's rent for the use of the vehicle. Can Mr Pioneer recover the unpaid amount?

Variation: Would it make a difference if Mr Pioneer had raised the rent of the vehicle to €3,000 per month after confirming that the vehicle was being used for Miss Pearl's profession?

Case Reference: Pearce v. Brooks [1866] LR 1 Ex 213.

CASE 3: CONTRACTS PROMOTING TELEPHONE SEX

Wicked Ltd, a telephone sex service provider, concluded a contract with Fun Ltd for the marketing of telephone cards. In connection with this marketing contract, the two companies concluded a loan contract by which Wicked Ltd borrowed €50,000 from Fun Ltd. Wicked Ltd delivered to Fun Ltd telephone sex cards and other telephone sex-related services for a value of €80,000. Some months later, the business relationship between Wicked Ltd and Fun Ltd started to deteriorate until it was eventually terminated. Fun Ltd has claimed from Wicked Ltd the repayment of the €50,000 loan. Can Wicked Ltd set off the claim and counterclaim €30,000 from Fun Ltd as payment for the delivered services?