If there is a discrepancy between the actual intention and the explicit or perceived intent of the parties, the question of whether or not a legal system maintains a contract depends on its approach to the contract: is it subjective (oriented towards true consensus) or is it obvious or objective (oriented towards the external aspect of an agreement)?  Unless it has been expressly withdrawn, as in the case of insurance contracts, the first contract (residual position) may be reopened if the second contract folds, as if it is cancelled for illegality. There is a presumption against innovation, so that “if in doubt, the court prefers not to involve novation”.  An important case in this regard is Electric Engraving Process and Stereo Co Irwin: On the other hand, contract law in the Netherlands is based on the laws of canon and nature. When she took the canonist position, it was said that all treaties were an exchange of promises that were consensual and bonae fidei, that is, simply based on mutual consent and good faith. From the point of view of Christians, that it is a sin to break the promise, the church`s lawyers have developed the principle of pacta sunt servanda, according to which all serious agreements must be applied, that strict formalities, as prescribed by secular law, have been respected.  According to the theory of the cause, in order to be binding, the treaty had to have an iusta causa or a legitimate ground that corresponded to Christian moral imperatives and which derives not only from a legitimate or just right, title or motive, but also from love and affection, moral consideration or past services.  A nudum pactum has been redefined as any agreement that, for lack of cause, is not applicable. All these principles have been applied uniformly by European ecclesiastical courts. The evidence is still admissible to show that the written contract is only part of the entire transaction and that a separate oral agreement, which was concluded at the same time, was not included in the written agreement – provided that the oral agreement dealt with an issue on which the document is silent and is not inconsistent with the terms of the written contract. Under these conditions, two contracts can be proven, one written and the other oral. It can therefore be shown that Roman law had a system of contracts concluded in which only four species (e.g.B.
contracts conensu, re, verbis and litteris), which were compulsory only if they were “clothed” in particular forms and formulas;  In other words, Roman law has “a right to contracts and not a right to contracts.”  This sets them apart from the current practice of characterizing as an enforceable contract any undertaking agreement that meets certain general requirements. This is only for contracts (. B for example, sale, leasing, partnership and mandate) that mutual consent (consensus ad ditto) in the festivities “dressed” in celebrations was enough to make the agreement enforceable. Any agreement that did not rigidly match the four types was called nudum pactum and was not feasible unless there was partial return. The development of the conensu treaties was stimulated by the commercial needs of the expanding Roman state, but Roman law never reached the point of imposing all serious and intentional agreements as treaties.  If the delay is not significant, the creditor can do so by sending the debtor a “notice of withdrawal” indicating that the creditor may terminate the contract if it does not act before the agreed date or on a date set in the notice of contract.