The East and South-East Asian jurisdictions and that of the European Union have in common the heterogeneity of their contract law traditions. In particular, both in the case of Asia and Europe, there is a high level of divergence when it comes to the contact law regimes reflecting different legal traditions. In the European Union, among its twenty-eight Member States, there exists twenty-nine different contract law regimes. Each of the EU Member States has its own contract law regime, but the United Kingdom has both English and Scottish contract law. Similar to the case of the Asian jurisdictions, in the European Union there is also a high level of contract law heterogeneity. The contract law jurisdictions of the European Union have already a decades-long history of more or less successful attempts at national and regional harmonisation and the more recent attempt to develop a pan-European Civil Code. In that sense, Durovic and Howells posit, where Asian jurisdictions attempt to harmonise their contract and commercial laws, the European experience may potentially be valuable for better comprehending the process of promoting harmonisation. In particular, the experience gained from the European contract law process is primarily beneficial to understand whether harmonisation among different contract law legal traditions is at all possible, and, if, so, to what extent and under what conditions. It is important to note that the European model is not to be taken as ‘a perfect model’, but only as a valuable practical experience which may help explain the complexity and challenges of the harmonisation process.