In my opinion law reform has focused around consumers mainly. In the view of contract law it can be unfair. You enter a contract with the assumption that both parties are at an equal footing. Certainly this is a determinate of remedies. An example is the court granting specific performance. A court will not grant specific performance to one party for breach of contract, if the other party had they been in the same position were not entitled to it.
Hence this doesn't fit easily when you have legislation like the Contracts Review Act 1980 which only give remedy to the consumer and not so much the business.
However reform has also reflected upon issues such as:
-providing an alternative to common law areas of law. e.g. the TPA means a person can sue under the Act, which is easier than proving the 6 elements of a contract;
-It provides alternatives to court - establishment of tribunals such as the CTTT.
-It has in some ways codified the common law, making it easier for people to understand their rights and obligations.
-There is an issue of international transactions. many lawyers will do what's called "Jurisdiction shopping" suing a person in a country that has laws which best benefit their client - e.g. suing an american company who entered into a contract with you in China and involved the transportation of goods to Canada from a German carrier.
