Home  About us  Contact
 

Private Law (private + law)

Distribution by Scientific Domains
Law and Criminology100%

Selected Abstracts

A Comparative Analysis of the Drafting of European Private Law

EUROPEAN LAW JOURNAL, Issue 5 2009
Bastiaan Van Zelst
The development of the ,Common Frame of Reference' is a highly prominent topic on the agenda of European integration. However, its underlying procedures have had only limited investigation. This article discusses the European private law project by inquiring into the drafting experiences of four other private law legislative processes, with a focus on sales law. These instruments concern Article 2 (on sales) of the American Uniform Commercial Code, the Vienna Sales Convention, the Dutch Civil Code and the Directive on Consumer Sales and Associated Guarantees. Ultimately, the article asks what can the European project learn from these experiences. [source]

The Culture of Private Law in Central Europe After Enlargement: A Polish Perspective

EUROPEAN LAW JOURNAL, Issue 5 2005

First page of article [source]

Social Justice in European Contract Law: a Manifesto

EUROPEAN LAW JOURNAL, Issue 6 2004
Study Group on Social Justice in European Private Law
The Study Group on Social Justice in European Private Law are: Gert Brüggemeier (Bremen), Mauro Bussani (Trieste), Hugh Collins (London), Aurelia Colombi Ciacchi (Bremen), Giovanni Comandé (Pisa), Muriel Fabre-Magnan (Nantes), Stefan Grundmann (Berlin), Martijn Hesselink (Amsterdam) (Chairman), Christian Joerges (Florence), Brigitta Lurger (Graz), Ugo Mattei (Torino), Marisa Meli (Catania), Jacobien Rutgers (Amsterdam), Christoph Schmidt (Florence), Jane Smith (Bremen), Ruth Sefton-Green (Paris), Horatia Muir Watt (Paris), Thomas Wilhelmsson (Helsinki). [source]

A European Legal Method?

EUROPEAN LAW JOURNAL, Issue 1 2009
On European Private Law, Scientific Method
This article examines the relationship between European private law and scientific method. It argues that a European legal method is a good idea. Not primarily because it will make European private law scholarship look more scientific, but because a debate on the method of a normative science necessarily has to be a debate on its normative assumptions. In other words, a debate on a European legal method will have much in common with the much desired debate on social justice in European law. Moreover, it submits that, at least after the adoption of the Common Frame of Reference by the European institutions, European contract law can be regarded as a developing multi-level system that can be studied from the inside. Finally, it concludes that the Europeanisation of private law is gradually blurring the dividing line between the internal and external perspectives, with their respective appropriate methods, in two mutually reinforcing ways. First, in the developing multi-level system it is unclear where the external borders of the system lie, in particular the borders between Community law and national law. Second, because of the less formal legal culture the (formerly) external perspectives, such as the economic perspective, have easier access and play an increasing role as policy considerations. [source]

The Politics of a European Civil Code

EUROPEAN LAW JOURNAL, Issue 6 2004
Martijn W. Hesselink
That plan forms an important step towards a European Civil Code. In its Plan, the Commission tries to depoliticise the codification process by asking a group of academic experts to prepare what it calls a ,common frame of reference'. This paper argues that drafting a European Civil Code involves making many choices that are essentially political. It further argues that the technocratic approach which the Commission has adopted in the Action Plan effectively excludes most stakeholders from having their say during the stage when the real choices are made. Therefore, before the drafting of the CFR/ECC starts, the Commission should submit a list of policy questions regarding the main issues of European private law to the European Parliament and the other stakeholders. Such an alternative procedure would repoliticise the process. It would increase the democratic basis for a European Civil Code and thus its legitimacy. [source]

Rights-based justifications for the tort of unlawful interference with economic relations

LEGAL STUDIES, Issue 2 2008
JW Neyers
The tort of unlawful interference with economic relations is anomalous since it allows a plaintiff to sue a defendant for a loss that is occasioned by an unlawful act committed by that defendant against a third party. This parasitic liability is seemingly in violation of the basic tort law principle that in order to make out a claim what the plaintiff must show is a violation of her own rights, not merely a wrong to someone else. Thus, it appears that the tort is an instance of damnum absque injuria. This paper examines whether this is in fact the case by examining if there are any rights-based theories that can explain the tort in a way that is consistent with basic private law principle. In other words, is it possible to find an independent right of the defendant that has somehow been violated, one which explains why the defendant is able to sue in their own right? Upon examination, it appears that the ,right to trade', ,remoteness' and ,abuse of right' theories are largely incapable of providing such an explanation since they display many seemingly insurmountable problems of coherence and fit with the existing case-law. More promising are the arguments that the tort is a justified exception to basic principle or that it is an example of public rights being vindicated in private law, yet each of these theories is also problematic in some respects. The overall thesis of the paper is that the tort of unlawful interference with economic relations is radically under-theorised and that it, and the other economic torts, could benefit tremendously from more intense academic examination. [source]

Insurers, Claims and the Boundaries of Good Faith

THE MODERN LAW REVIEW, Issue 1 2005
John Lowry
This article examines the refusal of the English courts to award damages for consequential losses following unreasonable delay on the part of insurers in settling a claim. This has the potential to give rise to dire consequences for insureds. These difficulties have been addressed in North American jurisdictions where the concept of good faith has been developed and applied as a means of both compensating insureds and regulating the conduct of insurers. However, a hallmark of English law is that it fails to draw a bright line between the law of contract and the law of contracts. As a result, the policy issues that should inform insurance contracts are excluded by virtue of the notion, imported from the law of contract, that the contractual relationship is a matter of private law and is not, therefore, a means for public regulation of insurers. [source]