Depending on the time of day at which you are reading this, you will need to take care not to spill either your cornflakes or cocktail.

I am dealing with one of the topics which raises the blood pressure of any true patriot: European contract law.

The European Commission has just taken another step in this area, although precisely where it is leading is not yet clear.

They conducted a consultation on 1 July 2010 on policy options for progress towards a European contract law for consumers and businesses.

The purpose was to set out different options to strengthen the internal market.

The consultation closed on 31 January 2011 and resulted in 320 responses (16% from lawyers, outnumbered by 42% from business organisations; 47 from the UK, outnumbered by 96 from Germany).

Now, they have just published what they call a Feasibility Study, although it is really a draft instrument with detailed clauses covering sales contracts and service contracts associated with sales, such as installation or maintenance, provided by the seller or under the seller's responsibility (e.g. by a sub-contractor).

It is applicable to both business-to-consumer contracts and business-to-business contracts.

The Commission is again inviting comments, by 1 July 2011.

The drafters include a range of experts.

I know that the Law Society complained recently that there were not enough common law experts on it, but out of 17 there were two from the UK: Professor Hugh Beale QC, FBA, Law Commissioner for England and Wales from 2000 to 2007 and currently Professor of Law at the University of Warwick; and Professor Eric Clive CBE, FRSE, member of the Scottish Law Commission from 1981 to 2000 and visiting Professor of Scots Law at the University of Edinburgh (I am well aware that Scotland is a mixed law system).

France was the only other country with as many representatives.

There was also a group to help the experts, the so-called ‘Sounding Board’, and there were representatives on that from Which?, the British Retail Consortium, and an English barrister. So you know where to aim your rotten tomatoes, if you are unhappy with the outcome so far as the UK is concerned.

The study gives a number of examples about how the great variety of different contract laws in the EU disadvantages citizens and small and medium enterprises.

The people in the examples are given names and cities, but it is not clear whether they are real or fictitious: a small British jewellery designing company which would have to pay €230,100 to be able to sell its pieces into every Member State.

Mrs Korhonen from Finland who pays higher prices locally than she would do on-line if buying from France, but is unsure of her consumer rights and so sticks to expensive Finland; and Mr Kowalski from Poland who has made an organic wooden bed for children but has to spend €10,000 in lawyers’ fees to sell it properly to Italy and Germany.

A single contract law would solve all of this, the Commission says.

As for what will happen next, all the Commission will say is that they must decide if, how and to what extent this feasibility study could serve as a starting point for the preparation of a political follow-up initiative.

The Commission will use the Expert Group's text as a 'toolbox' in the preparation of a possible future initiative on European contract law.

However, the Commission’s views were made clear in a document I referred to a couple of weeks ago – the Single Market Act – where they state, under one of their 12 levers for action, that "An optional European contract law instrument should be introduced to facilitate crossborder transactions in the Single Market" – in other words, a Europe-wide contract law into which you can opt if you want.

The Law Society is not happy even with such an optional instrument, and recently commented: " … our practitioners do not believe that there is a need for an optional instrument of European contract law and view the key barriers to cross-border trade as practical and procedural … introducing a second legal system across the EU member states will lead to increased confusion for businesses and consumers.

It will not be possible to ensure uniform application of a new, untested legal system and national divergences will continue."

So, the story goes on. But one safe bet is that the UK will continue to oppose any new EU measures in contract law.