Second in a four-part series. Presents a conceptual 'map' of the so-called 'intellectual superstructure' of the Scots law of delict, identifying the topic of 'delict' itself as a taxonomical 'family' under which can be found four distinct 'genera': liability based on damnum injuria, liability based on iniuria, liability for wrongful interference with property, and liability for the commission of nominate 'delicticles' which have in common only the fact that they involve mechanisms for determi...
First in a four-part series. Questions the extent to which Scots lawyers should 'revel' in the fame of the case of Donoghue v Stevenson 1932 SC (HL) 31 in light of the fact that Scotland is not itself a Common law jurisdiction. Discusses the difficulties with the idea - taken as an article of faith in the case itself - that 'there [was] no speciality of Scots law involved and that the case [could] safely be decided on principles common to both systems [i.e., Scots and English law]' and consid...
Third in a four-part series. Identifies that the twin factors tying together all cases of 'delict' is the need to establish the 'wrongfulness' of the defender's act or omission as well as the 'blameworthiness' of the defender for the wrong. Notes that liability under damnum iniuria (i.e., Aquilian liability) has an additional requirement that is anterior to wrongfulness: the need to prove the occurrence of a legally recognised 'loss'. Suggests that liability under damnum iniuria is principall...
Final article in a four-part series. Argues that notwithstanding the fact that the case of Donoghue v Stevenson 1932 SC (HL) 71 is celebrated in Scotland, the 'duty of care' concept which it cemented in Scots law is in fact nugatory. Contends that the principle of 'remoteness of damages' - still used in practice today, with the law pertaining to such clarified by Simmons v British Steel Plc 2004 SC (HL) 94 - in fact serves to properly limit the actionability of claims for wrongfully caused lo...
It is rare even for a Supreme Court case to provide a judgment as consequential as Morris-Garner v One Step (Support) Ltd., finally bringing clarity to issues first raised by Wrotham Park in 1973, imposing much-needed structure on the nature and availability of negotiating damages for breach of contract, and confining Attorney General v Blake as a wholly distinct form of award.
Collections in this community
Electronic copies of Law and Philosophy blog posts and website contributions.
Electronic copies of Law and Philosophy book chapters and sections.
Electronic copies of Law and Philosophy book reviews.
Electronic copies of Philosophy conference papers and proceedings.
Electronic theses of Law and Philosophy students.
Electronic copies of Law and Philosophy journal articles.
Electronic copies of Law and Philosophy manuals.
Electronic copies of Law and Philosophy newspaper/magazine articles.
Electronic copies of Law and Philosophy policy documents.
Electronic copies of Law and Philosophy reports and discussion papers.
Electronic copies of Law and Philosophy research reports.
Electronic copies of Law and Philosophy technical reports.
Electronic copies of Law and Philosophy working papers.