Despite the centrality of the contributory negligence doctrine in practice, almost nothing is known about how it functions in reality. The authors, seeking to fill this deficit in understanding, have undertaken a wide-ranging empirical study of how the doctrine is handled by the courts. They report their methodology and findings in this volume, framing their discussion within the law of contributory negligence. The study is based on 572 first instance decisions on contributory negligence from across the United Kingdom decided between 2000 and 2016, and 129 appellate decisions handed down in the same period. The analysis considers the operation of the contributory negligence doctrine at first instance and on appeal, and in a range of contextual settings, including road accidents, accidents at work, and professional negligence claims. The authors also consider how the study can be used to inform future developments in this area of law. Substantial appendices set out the key data on which the book is based, enabling academics to utilize the dataset in their own research and allowing practitioners to compare their cases easily with previously decided claims.

How often our actions go awry because our perceptions are at odds with reality! This book examines the legal issues that arise when we seek to avoid the untoward consequences of an action by claiming that our perception was flawed. We all make mistakes. Some have unfortunate consequences: we might overpay a debt or make an unfavourable contract, or we might be sued or accused of a crime as a result of our mistake.
Claims to alleviation on the grounds of mistake are likely to arise wherever the law prescribes a state of mind (some kind of intent) as a prerequisite for the application of a legal rule. This book asks when the fact that a person made a mistake should entitle them to alleviation. This may involve the intention to enter into a contract or a payment, in which case a person could seek its reversal, or it might involve the intent to commit a tort or crime, in which case they could seek forgiveness for the offence. Farnsworth defines 'alleviating' mistakes as those which entitle a person to relief from untoward consequences of their mistake.
There is no general 'law of mistake', and despite their similarities, few discussions of mistake in one setting pause to consider mistakes in other contexts. The goals of fields as disparate as contracts and criminal law are very different: how do these differences affect the treatment of mistakes? Farnsworth sets out a new taxonomy of mistakes. His analysis reveals that over the past century, there has been a remarkable increase in the receptivity of courts and scholars to claims for both reversal and forgiveness--a waxing of alleviating mistakes.

The scope of vicarious liability has significantly expanded since its original conception. Today employers are being found liable for actions of employees that they did not authorise, and never would have authorised if asked. They are being held liable for an employee's criminal activity. In the related strict liability field of non-delegable duties, they are being held liable for wrongdoing of independent contractors. Notions of strict liability have grown increasingly isolated in the law of tort, given the exponential growth in the tort of negligence. They require intellectual justification. Such a justification has proven to be elusive and largely unsatisfactory in relation to vicarious liability and to concepts of non-delegable duty. The law of three jurisdictions studied has now apparently embraced the 'enterprise risk' theory to rationalise the imposition of vicarious liability. This book subjects this theory to strong critique by arguing that it has many weaknesses, which the courts should acknowledge. It suggests that a rationalisation of the liability of an employer for the actions of an employee lies in more traditional legal doctrine which would serve to narrow the circumstances in which an employer is legally liable for a wrong committed by an employee.

The volume focuses on litigation damages, economic and non-economic, including punitive damages; their definitions, calculations, and assignments in the US and EU. The objective is to examine areas of convergence and divergence in the academic and practical treatment of damages issues in the US and EU. Many of the chapters in the volume are drawn from the papers and discussions generated at the Transatlantic Dialogue meetings of the National Association of Forensic Economics that began in Edinburgh, Scotland, in 2004. That meeting focused on the development of the 'Ogden' multipliers for calculating damages mandated for consideration by UK Courts in 1999. The 2005 meetings (Dublin, Ireland) centred on Markov methodologies used in the US for generating work-life tables and their adoption into damages multipliers, punitive damages, and the process of Irish tort reform. In 2006 discussions in Florence, Italy, focused on methods for calculating non-economic damages in the US and EU as well as the process of harmonization of tort law within the EU. Most recently, the 2007 discussions in Barcelona, Spain, dealt with comparisons of scheduled damages systems in the US and the EU.

Rights, Wrongs, and Injustices is the first comprehensive account of the scope, foundations, and structure of remedial law in common law jurisdictions. The rules governing the kinds of complaints that common law courts will accept are generally well understood. However, the rules governing when and how they respond to such complaints are not. This book provides that understanding. It argues that remedies are judicial rulings, and that remedial law is the law governing their availability and content. Focusing on rulings that resolve private law disputes (for example, damages, injunctions, and restitutionary orders), this book explains why remedial law is distinctive, how it relates to substantive law, and what its foundational principles are. The book advances four main arguments. First, the question of what courts should do when individuals seek their assistance (the focus of remedial law) is different from the question of how individuals should treat one another in their day-to-day lives (the focus of substantive law). Second, remedies provide distinctive reasons to perform the actions they command; in particular, they provide reasons different from those provided by either rules or sanctions. Third, remedial law has a complex relationship to substantive law. Some remedies are responses to rights-threats, others to wrongs, and yet others to injustices. Further, remedies respond to these events in different ways: while many remedies (merely) replicate substantive duties, others modify substantive duties and some create entirely new duties. Finally, remedial law is underpinned by general principles-principles that cut across the traditional distinctions between so-called "legal" and "equitable" remedies. Together, these arguments provide an understanding of remedial law that takes the concept of a remedy seriously, classifies remedies according to their grounds and content, illuminates the relationship between remedies and substantive law, and presents remedial law as a body of principles rather than a historical category.

This book undertakes an analysis of academic and judicial responses to the problem of evidential uncertainty in causation in negligence. It seeks to bring clarity to what has become a notoriously complex area by adopting a clear approach to the function of the doctrine of causation within a corrective justice-based account of negligence liability. It first explores basic causal models and issues of proof, including the role of statistical and epidemiological evidence, in order to isolate the problem of evidential uncertainty more precisely. Application of Richard Wright's NESS test to a range of English case law shows it to be more comprehensive than the 'but for' test that currently dominates, thereby reducing the need to resort to additional tests, such as the Wardlaw test of material contribution to harm, the scope and meaning of which are uncertain. The book builds on this foundation to explore the solution to a range of problems of evidential uncertainty, focusing on the Fairchild principle and the idea of risk as damage, as well as the notion of loss of a chance in medical negligence which is often seen as analogous with 'increase in risk', in an attempt to bring coherence to this area of the law.

Brings together the legislation that students on Scottish LLB law of obligations courses need to know about Avizandum Legislation on the Scots Law of Obligations takes a unitary approach to this difficult and fragmented subject. It contains a wide-ranging selection of materials, including statutes, statutory instruments, EU Directives and Codes, relating to contract, delict and unjustified enrichment, together with provisions that affect the general law on civil liability. Key contents include: Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 Sale of Goods Act 1979 Requirements of Writing (Scotland) Act 1995 Consumer Rights Act 2015 Unidroit Principles for International Commercial Contracts 2016

This book looks at the negligence concept of tort law and studies the efficiency issue arising from the determination of negligence. It does so by scrutinizing actual court decisions from three common law jurisdictions - Britain, India and the United States of America. This volume fills a very significant gap, scrutinizing 52 landmark judgments from these three countries, by focussing on the negligent affliction of economic loss determined by common law courts and how these findings relate to the existing theoretical literature. By doing so, it examines the formalization of legal concepts in theory, primarily the question of negligence determination and liability, and their centrality in theories concerning tort law. This book will be very helpful for students, professors and practitioners of law, jurisprudence and legal theory. It will additionally be of use to researchers and academics interested in law and economics, procedure and legal history.

In the mid 1980s, there was a crisis in the availability, affordability, and adequacy of liability insurance in the United States and Canada. Mass tort claims such as the asbestos, DES, and Agent Orange litigation generated widespread public attention, and the tort system came to assume a heightened prominence in American life. While some scholars debate whether or not any such crisis still exists, there has been an increasing political, judicial and academic questioning of the goals and future of the tort system.
Exploring the Domain of Tort Law reviews the evidence on the efficacy of the tort system and its alternatives. By looking at empirical evidence in five major categories of accidents--automobile, medical malpractice, product-related accidents, environmental injuries, and workplace injuries--the authors evaluate the degree to which the tort system conforms to three normative goals: deterrence, corrective justice, and distributive justice. In each case, the authors review the deterrence and compensatory properties of the tort system, and then review parallel bodies of evidence on regulatory, penal, and compensatory alternatives.
Most of the academic literature on the tort system has traditionally been doctrinal or, in recent years, highly theoretical. Very little of this literature provides an in-depth consideration of how the system works, and whether or not there are any feasible alternatives. Exploring the Domain of TortLaw contributes valuable new evidence to the tort law reform debate. It will be of interest to academic lawyers and economists, policy analysts, policy professionals in government and research organizations, and all those affected by tort law reform.

This book is based closely on the lectures delivered by Tony Weir in 1996 as part of the Clarendon Law lectures series sponsored by Oxford University Press. It is an exciting and provocative book which contains a number of controversial propositions, defended with vigour by its author. The three lectures reproduced here deal with liability in tort for intentionally inflicted economic loss. They are characterized by a very unusual combination of bold leading statements and multi-layered supporting analysis. There are also useful Appendices containing full case transcripts of recent, significant cases, including Millar v Bassey and de Voto v Pacific. This book will be irresistible to all scholars of the law of tort, and the author's reputation alone will ensure this book is well-received.

When potential litigants first approach a lawyer they are generally interested in finding out one thing only: are they likely to be able to win damages or any other kind of remedy and what kind of quantum of damages are they likely to receive? It becomes the lawyer's main task to try to argue for a remedy and to persuade the court that the plaintiff has a good cause of action. Textbooks about contract and tort frequently treat damages and other remedies as an after-thought when in fact it is the issue of remedies which is a constant and ever-present consideration for the plaintiff and his or her lawyer. This new book, containing contributions from many of the UK's leading specialists, brings to the fore a range of issues which are of topical interest to litigators and to teachers of law. In some instances the issues are currently the subject of reform proposals and these essays usefully highlight the principal issues facing the reformers and the objections which have been raised by those opposed to reform. In addition four of the essays tackle a strand of tort law which is of rapidly growing importance - the area of professional negligence. The contributors are among the best-known writers in this field and their essays combine practical and academic perspectives which usefully highlight contemporary trends in professional negligence litigation. The first chapter in the book also offers a unique and controversial overview of tort law in the UK by Professor Patrick Atiyah, who argues for a complete rethink of the system of personal injuries litigation in the UK, starting with its abolition. Not for the first time, Professor Atiyah thinks the unthinkable.

Regulating Law explores how the goals and policies of the new regulatory state are fundamentally reshaping jurisprudence in the domains of public law, private law, and the regulation of work and business. Fourteen areas of the core legal curriculum are reassessed from the standpoint of the impact of regulation on mainstream legal doctrine. The volume examines the collision of regulation by law with regulation by other means and provides an innovative regulatory perspective for the whole of law. To date, regulatory scholarship has mainly been applied to specific legislative programs and/or agencies for the social and economic regulation of business. In this volume, a cast of internationally renowned legal scholars each apply a 'regulatory perspective' to their own area of law. Their contributions provide a rich analysis of the limits and potential of legal doctrine as an instrument of control both in regulatory settings, and in settings traditionally immune from regulatory analysis. The result is an examination of the regulation of the doctrines of law itself, and of the way in which law regulates other forms of regulation and social ordering- law as subject and object of regulation.

Fourth in the popular and well-regarded SPTL seminar series, this book explores the concepts of privacy and loyalty in the law of obligations. Privacy and fiduciary obligations are two very topical subjects. The contributions include: "Privacy as a Constitutional Right and Value" by Eric Barendt; "Comparative Rights of Privacy of Public Figures" by Basil Markesinis and Nico Nolte; and "Constructive Fiduciaries?" by Lionel Smith. These essays combine practical and academic perspectives which highlight contemporary trends in the law of obligations. In addition to the essays, there is an extended editor's introduction by Peter Birks, a recognized expert in this field.

Tort Law: A Modern Perspective is an advanced yet accessible introduction to tort law for lawyers, law students, and others. Reflecting the way tort law is taught today, it explains the cases and legal doctrines commonly found in casebooks using modern ideas about public policy, economics, and philosophy. With an emphasis on policy rationales, Tort Law encourages readers to think critically about the justifications for legal doctrines. Although the topic of torts is specific, the conceptual approach should pay dividends to those who are interested broadly in regulatory policy and the role of law. Incorporating three decades of advancements in tort scholarship, Tort Law is the textbook for modern torts classrooms.

This book is about privacy interests in English tort law. Despite the recent recognition of a misuse of private information tort, English law remains underdeveloped. The presence of gaps in the law can be explained, to some extent, by a failure on the part of courts and legal academics to reflect on the meaning of privacy. Through comparative, critical and historical analysis, this book seeks to refine our understanding of privacy by considering our shared experience of it. To this end, the book draws on the work of Norbert Elias and Karl Popper, among others, and compares the English law of privacy with the highly elaborate German law. In doing so, the book reaches the conclusion that an unfortunate consequence of the way English privacy law has developed is that it gives the impression that justice is only for the rich and famous. If English courts are to ensure equalitarian justice, the book argues that they must reflect on the value of privacy and explore the bounds of legal possibility.

Cases arising from disputes between neighbours (what English law would describe in terms of the law of nuisance) fall towards the edge of the law of tort, on its boundary with the law of property. They therefore provide a good example of how the categorisation of a case can affect the liability rule: tort law is typically concerned with fault, property law with strict liability. The aim of this book is to examine the importance of these category shifts, as well as the extent to which statutory interventions, planning control and the like have had an impact on the analysis of tortuous liability.

This detailed description and comparative analysis of the development of tort law in Europe over the last 150 years is based on national reports that are structured by a basic questionnaire. The national reports are complemented with a comparative analysis of the parallel, though often diverging, developments in the different legal systems. It can clearly be seen that different groups in the legal systems, such as judges and scholars, often had diverging views on tort law that were translated into more specific doctrinal and evaluative statements. Accompanied by a general expansion of liability due to changing perceptions of the risks of accidents, the former Roman law of delict and the medieval law of torts have been transformed into modern rules of extra-contractual liability that are deeply entrenched into the social security and insurance systems.

Technological developments posed a challenge to the established law, especially tort law, at approximately the same time across Europe. This book focuses on the similarity and diversity of responses to such developments in different jurisdictions. Three examples have been studied in depth: the escape of sparks from steam engines in the middle of the nineteenth century; exploding boilers in the latter part of the nineteenth century; and asbestos-related industrial disease in the middle and late twentieth century. The book shows how the rules of tort law were used and adapted and demonstrates how other systems of regulation and compensation were introduced to prevent injuries or to provide compensation to victims outside tort law. The relatively marginal role of tort law in these areas reveals much about legal development in general.

The major mental health reforms of the last generation in the U.S.A. have given rise to much discussion and often heated debate; but have they actually produced any real changes? This book is the first overview of this controversial subject - and the author's appraisal of the consequences of these reforms is surprising. Changes which were originally aimed at making it more difficult to hospitalize and treat people with mental illness, and easier to punish them, have actually resulted in far less change than was predicted or intended. This stimulating book argues that, when the law contradicted commonsense ideas of how to deal with the mentally ill, it was bent or ignored, whether by judges, medical professionals, or family members.

The lectures presented in this volume examine the fast-growing compensation culture and the consequential pressure on courts to widen the range of situations in which individuals can claim damages from the State. Within domestic legal systems, there has been a considerable extension of tortious liability which is impinging on the State and its resources. These lectures address statutory and administrative compensation, and examine the influence of group actions and of globalization. Pressure on domestic legal systems has been increased by transnational courts, notably the Court of Human Rights and the European Court of Justice. Carol Harlow argues that this trend towards judicialization is undesirable, and that greater use should be made of extrajudicial remedies. She contends that the issue of compensation is too important to be left to the courts.

This book examines financial compensation for wrongs committed by public bodies including medical negligence, educational errors, child abuse by local authority carers, and police misconduct. Recent English cases are analysed and compared with European decisions. Explanation is given of ways of gaining compensation outside the courts, through complaints-procedures, ombudsmen, and statutory schemes.

In its case law, the European Court of Human Rights has acknowledged that national courts are bound to give effect to Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) which sets out the right to private and family life, when they rule on controversies between private individuals. Article 8 of the ECHR has thus been accorded mittelbare Drittwirkung or indirect 'third-party' effect in private law relationships. The German law of privacy, centring on the "allgemeines Persoenlichkeitsrecht", has quite a long history, and the influence of the European Court of Human Rights' interpretation of the ECHR has led to a strengthening of privacy protection in the German law. This book considers how English courts could possibly use and adapt structures adopted by the German legal order in response to rulings from the European Court of Human Rights, to strengthen the protection of privacy in the private sphere.

This book is a broad and deep inquiry into how contingency fees distort our civil justice system, influence our political system, and endanger democratic governance. Contingency fees are the way personal injury lawyers finance access to the courts for those wrongfully injured. Although the public senses that lawyers manipulate the justice system to serve their own ends, few are aware of the high costs that come with contingency fees. This book sets out to change that, providing a window into the seamy underworld of contingency fees that the bar and the courts not only tolerate but even protect and nurture. Contrary to a broad academic consensus, the book argues that the financial incentives for lawyers to litigate are so inordinately high that they perversely impact our civil justice system and impose other unconscionable costs. It thus presents the intellectual architecture that underpins all tort reform efforts.

This book proposes a comprehensive approach to confronting racism through a foundational framework as well as practical strategies to correct and reverse the course of the past and catalyze the stalled efforts of the present. It will do so by focusing on those specific aspects of law and legal theory that intersect with psychological research and practice. In Part I, the historical and current underpinnings of racial injustice and the obstacles to combating racism are introduced. Part II examines the documented psychological and emotional effects of racism, including race-based traumatic stress. In Part III, the authors analyze the application of forensic mental health assessment in addressing race-related experiences and present a legal and policy framework for reforming institutional and organizational policies. Finally, in part IV the authors advocate for a close, collaborative approach among legal and mental health professionals and their clients to seek redress for racial discrimination. Confronting Racism provides a framework for legal, mental health, and other related social science professionals and leaders to acknowledge and act on the harmful aspects of our societal systems.

This book develops a theory of tort law that integrates deontic and consequential approaches by applying justificational analysis to identify the factors, circumstances, and values that shape tort law. Drawing on Kantian and Rawlsian philosophy, and on the insights of game theorist Ken Binmore, this book refocuses tort law on a single theory of responsibility that explains and justifies the broad range of tort doctrine and concepts. Under this theory, tort law asks people to appropriately incorporate the well-being of others into the decisions they make, explains when that duty applies, and explains the scope and limits of that duty. The theory also incorporates a theory of the evolutionary development of social values that people use, and ought to use, in meeting that duty and explains how decision-making from behind the veil of ignorance allows us to evaluate the is in light of the ought.