Showing papers in "Legal Studies in 2015"
TL;DR: In the wake of the financial crisis, there has been much discussion about whether boards (particularly of banks) are sufficiently accountable as discussed by the authors, which is problematic: without a clearer idea of the elusive concept of accountability, debates about board accountability may be at cross-purposes.
Abstract: In the wake of the financial crisis, there has been much discussion about whether boards (particularly of banks) are sufficiently accountable. However, while a significant literature has grown up in relation to the study of accountability in various disciplines, particularly public administration and politics, in the field of corporate governance there has been little consideration of what accountability means or entails. This is problematic: without a clearer idea of the elusive concept of accountability, debates about board accountability may be at cross-purposes. It will be difficult to assess whether particular corporate governance mechanisms promote board accountability, and if not, why not. The lack of clarity can also mask accountability deficits. This paper addresses this gap, setting out why accountability is important and offering an account of what accountability means in the corporate governance context, focusing on board accountability, in order to provide a framework for future research.
34 citations
TL;DR: This paper addresses the question of the significance of law for the treatment, care and the end-of-life decision making for patients with chronic disorders of consciousness by exploring the images of law that were drawn upon and invoked by these family members when negotiating the situation of their relatives, including, in some cases, the ending of their lives.
Abstract: This paper addresses, from a socio-legal perspective, the question of the significance of law for the treatment, care and the end-of-life decision making for patients with chronic disorders of consciousness. We use the phrase ‘chronic disorders of consciousness’ as an umbrella term to refer to severely brain-injured patients in prolonged comas, vegetative or minimally conscious states. Based on an analysis of interviews with family members of patients with chronic disorders of consciousness, we explore the images of law that were drawn upon and invoked by these family members when negotiating the situation of their relatives, including, in some cases, the ending of their lives. By examining ‘legal consciousness’ in this way (an admittedly confusing term in the context of this study,) we offer a distinctly sociological contribution to the question of how law matters in this particular domain of social life.
24 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the distinction between being autonomous and having capacity for the purposes of the Mental Capacity Act is explored, where a person misuses affective attitudes in making the decision; a person's decision is not authentic to their values; and the mental capacity act prevents use of the context or outcome of the decision in assessing capacity.
Abstract: This paper explores the distinction between being autonomous and having capacity for the purposes of the Mental Capacity Act. These include where a person misuses affective attitudes in making the decision; where a person's decision is not authentic to their values; and where the Mental Capacity Act prevents use of the context or outcome of the decision in assessing capacity. These gaps mean that a person can be found to have capacity, even though they are not properly autonomous. This, we argue, justifies the courts’ use of the inherent jurisdiction to protect vulnerable adults who, while having capacity are not able to act autonomously.
21 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examine the new legal framework on consumer Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in the EU and identify that harmonizing the complaint submission in a pan-European Online Dispute resolution (ODR) platform, and directing parties to nationally approved ADR entities that comply with minimum standards, will not fulfil the potential of an extra-judicial consumer redress system.
Abstract: This paper examines the new legal framework on consumer Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in the EU. Its primary contribution lies in identifying that harmonising the complaint submission in a pan-European Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) platform, and directing parties to nationally approved ADR entities that comply with minimum standards, will not fulfil the potential of an extra-judicial consumer redress system. This paper proposes key functions that the ODR platform should incorporate if it is to provide effective redress. This paper also argues that a successful ODR platform should include built-in incentives that encourage parties to: (i) participate in approved ADR processes; (ii) settle complaints with little or no intervention from neutral third parties; and (iii) ensure voluntary compliance with final outcomes.
16 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors explore the extent to which participants were able, and willing, to understand and apply judicial directions, and the legal tests or criteria contained therein, and suggest that fundamental tensions may exist between legal and lay imaginaries, such that jurors are reluctant to jettison their more natural inclinations to reach individual and collective verdicts on the basis of narrative constructions grounded in "common sense" and "personal experience".
Abstract: Based on a findings of a simulation study in which 160 members of the public observed a mini rape trial re-enactment and were then asked to deliberate in jury groups towards a unanimous verdict, this paper explores the extent to which participants were able, and willing, to understand and apply judicial directions, and the legal tests or criteria contained therein. More specifically, it reflects on whether the additional provision of written directions in the jury room influenced the tone or direction of jurors' discussions, and illustrates the limited recourse made by participants to their contents, as well as their tendency to misinterpret or misapply them when they were relied upon. Having done so, this paper moves on to explore the reasons behind this limited impact, suggesting that fundamental tensions may exist between legal and lay imaginaries, such that jurors are reluctant to jettison their more natural inclinations to reach individual and collective verdicts on the basis of narrative constructions grounded in ‘common sense’ and ‘personal experience’.
15 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the margin of appreciation (MoA) doctrine of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) or Court, should be understood as, inter alia, an underenforcement doctrine, according to which Convention rights should not be applied to their full conceptual limits.
Abstract: The paper argues that the margin of appreciation (MoA) doctrine of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR, or Court), should be understood as, inter alia, an underenforcement doctrine, according to which Convention rights should not be applied to their full conceptual limits. Underenforcement is justified by institutional considerations relating to the Court's role and competence. Although institutional considerations have been theorised normatively, the paper claims that ‘low-level’ empirical inquiry into the comparative institutional competence of different decision makers across the Council of Europe is critical in explaining MoA. Such comparative empirical analysis ties shared institutional responsibility and subsidiarity with certain traits of decision makers when determining Convention rights. In this context, the paper briefly compares the decision making abilities of different institutions. It concludes by stressing that under certain circumstances the Court can be worse placed than national authorities to decide on violations of Convention rights. This is corroborated by the Court's case-law concerning Convention rights impinging on the economic and social policies of States Parties.
13 citations
TL;DR: This article argued that personal values serve as one such tacit influence on decision-making and pointed out that despite the lack of explicit diversity, there is an element of tacit diversity in the UK Supreme Court, which is reflected in judicial decisions.
Abstract: It has long been argued that the Judicial Committee of the House of Lords, now the UK Supreme Court, is characterised by Justices who are white and male, with a public school and Oxbridge education. Despite continuous debate and reflection on the lack of diversity, by academics, government and the popular press, little has changed. These debates have centred on explicit diversity, overt characteristics that are easily codified and reflect how the judiciary is seen. Drawing on the psychological theory of decision making, this paper argues that judicial decisions are subject to tacit influences that are not limited to overt characteristics. Personal values serve as one such tacit influence on decision making. Personal values are formed by life experiences and reflect many of the characteristics identified within the explicit diversity debates. However, personal values are influenced by more than simple demographic variables. This paper uses the example of personal values to highlight the fact that despite the lack of explicit diversity, there is an element of tacit diversity in the Supreme Court, which is reflected in judicial decisions. The impact of these findings serves to extend the debates surrounding diversity, highlighting the limitation of debates centred on explicit diversity alone.
11 citations
TL;DR: This article argued that ranking of law schools and law reviews runs the risk of driving us away from quality based on substance towards proceduralisation and quality assessment based on proxies favored by managers of law school, funding bodies and government agencies, instead of by the forum of legal scholars.
Abstract: Rankings of law schools and law journals are part of a trend towards more emphasis in academia on transparency and accountability with regard to the quality of research and education. Globalisation increases the need to compare law schools and law journals across borders, but this raises complicated questions due to differences in language, education systems, publishing style and so on. In this contribution, it is argued that ranking of law schools and law reviews runs the risk of driving us away from quality based on substance towards proceduralisation and quality assessment based on proxies favoured by managers of law schools, funding bodies and government agencies, instead of by the forum of legal scholars.
11 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the influence of Jones v Kernott on subsequent cases was considered, where there is only one legal owner of a home and a non-legal-owning cohabitant seeks to establish that he has an equitable interest in it under a common intention constructive trust.
Abstract: This paper considers the influence of the Supreme Court decision in Jones v Kernott on subsequent cases. It focuses on situations with which Jones was not directly concerned, namely where there is only one legal owner of a home and a non-legal-owning cohabitant seeks to establish that he has an equitable interest in it under a common intention constructive trust. The paper argues that while judges have mostly accepted that Jones is relevant to such sole-owner cases, they have had few opportunities (and taken fewer) to move beyond the restrictive approach of Lloyds Bank plc v Rosset and allow novel outcomes in the light of Jones as yet. It is contended that this state of affairs could ultimately produce a conservative approach that is undesirable for cohabitants who make indirect or non-financial contributions to shared lives, and remain without comprehensive statutory property and financial provision on relationship breakdown.
9 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors develop a holistic doctrinal approach to liability of speech intermediaries, such as Internet service providers (ISPs), booksellers and newspaper vendors, for defamation.
Abstract: The legal framework concerning liability of communication intermediaries for defamation is under-conceptualised. The paper thus develops a holistic doctrinal approach to liability of speech intermediaries, such as Internet service providers (ISPs), booksellers and newspaper vendors, for defamation. It views intermediary liability for defamatory speech against the backdrop of communication theory and freedom of expression doctrine. If properly conceptualised, as suggested in this paper, the law of defamation can accommodate the cyberspace-specific legislation in Arts 12–15 of the e-commerce Directive and s 5 of the Defamation Act 2013, as well as the innocent dissemination defence in s 1 of the Defamation Act 1996, now to be read together with s 10 of the Defamation Act 2013. The paper establishes six tenets of intermediary liability for defamatory content. In particular, it argues that ‘publication’ is to be conceptualised as a merely factual requirement for defamation, whereas the defence of ‘innocent publication’, also known as ‘innocent dissemination’, is a fault-based concept. Communication intermediaries are thus to be considered ‘publishers’, even if they have a merely automatic role in the publication process, but they may avail themselves of the defence of ‘innocent publication’. This defence has to be applied in compliance with the human rights of the parties involved.
8 citations
TL;DR: The Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 purports to move away from the identification doctrine, towards a genuinely organisational model of corporate liability as discussed by the authors, however, there is a risk that insistence upon the involvement of senior management in corporate manslaughter will reduce the Act to doing no more than aggregating individual misconduct.
Abstract: The Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 purports to move away from the identification doctrine, towards a genuinely organisational model of corporate liability. There is a risk, however, that insistence upon the involvement of senior management in corporate manslaughter will reduce the Act to doing no more than aggregating individual misconduct. Such an approach would fail both to encompass the culpability of the organisation as more than just a collection of individuals, and to offer an effective tool for the prosecution of large organisations. I argue that the senior management requirement should not be interpreted as focusing on individuals, but on the authoritative systems of work that organisations impose upon their employees. Inherent in large organisations is a corporate structure, determining the meaning and value of what employees perceive and the boundaries and direction of their work. These structures emerge from the involvement of senior managers, whose rank and role within organisations enables them to contribute to the development of corporate structure. Through insistence on the involvement of these corporate architects and surveyors, the 2007 Act may be seen to emphasise the role of the organisation in corporate manslaughter, identifying truly corporate culpability.
TL;DR: The constitutional referendum is often conceptualised as the ultimate institutional expression of popular sovereignty as discussed by the authors, and it has two main, overlapping virtues: first, its role in facilitating the contestation and checking of executive power in the area of constitutional change, and secondly, its instrumental role in fostering a wider culture of civic participation.
Abstract: The constitutional referendum is often conceptualised as the ultimate institutional expression of popular sovereignty. However, ‘direct democracy’ is viewed apprehensively by many political and legal theorists, particularly republican scholars. They argue that referendums risk engendering a dangerous ‘populism’ while detracting from the deliberative and moderating virtues of parliamentary democracy. In this paper, I defend the political value of the constitutional referendum from within republican theory, arguing that there is a misplaced focus on parliamentary supremacy within much of the literature on ‘political constitutionalism’. However, I argue it should be valued neither as a mechanism for giving expression to popular will, nor as an intervention by the mythologised ‘constituent power’ – or indeed, contra Tierney, as a ‘sovereign’ exercise in any sense. Rather, it has two main, overlapping virtues: first, its role in facilitating the contestation and checking of executive power in the area of constitutional change, and secondly, its instrumental role in fostering a wider culture of civic participation.
TL;DR: In this paper, an alternative approach to the relationship between the domestic courts' obligations under the Human Rights Act 1998 and the doctrine of precedent is presented, based on analysis of the nature of the doctrine and the reasons offered by Lord Bingham in his leading judgment in Kay.
Abstract: Conflicts between domestic precedents and subsequent decisions of the European Court of Human Rights have resulted in the lower courts following prior domestic decisions even when convinced that they will be overruled on appeal. The standard interpretation of the decision of the House of Lords in Kay v Lambeth holds the lower courts to domestic precedents that are manifestly inconsistent with the subsequent Strasbourg jurisprudence and admits only the most limited exception. This paper advances an alternative approach to the relationship between the domestic courts' obligations under the Human Rights Act 1998 and the doctrine of precedent by analysis of the nature of the doctrine of precedent and the reasons offered by Lord Bingham in his leading judgment in Kay. This analysis is then extended and applied to two recent cases in which the lower courts have considered themselves bound by a decision of the UK's highest appeal court that fails to give due effect to the applicants' Convention rights.
TL;DR: In 2012, the Law Commission examined the case for extending the racially and religiously aggravated offences in the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, so that they also cover disability, sexual orientation and transgender identity as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: In 2012, the Ministry of Justice asked the Law Commission to examine the case for extending the racially and religiously aggravated offences in the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, so that they also cover disability, sexual orientation and transgender identity. The terms of reference for the project were narrow, and did not include an examination of whether the existing offences are in need of reform. The Commission recommended that before a final decision is taken as to whether the offences should be extended, a full-scale review of the operation of the existing offences should be carried out. This paper contends that, in determining the future of the aggravated offences, consideration should be given to the procedural difficulties that can be encountered during the prosecution stage of the criminal process. The paper highlights a number of significant procedural problems that arise from the structure of the existing aggravated offences. These problems are largely related to alternative charges, whereby the prosecution charge both the aggravated offence and the lesser offence encompassed within it, and alternative verdicts, whereby the jury can convict of the lesser offence if the aggravated element is not proven. This paper argues that the procedural problems, coupled with a failure to properly understand the offences, can lead, and have led, to unfair outcomes. If the offences cannot be prosecuted effectively, they become little more than an empty gesture to those affected by hate crime, and this may be counterproductive. Procedural problems also put defendants at risk of wrongful conviction. The paper concludes that the preferred way forward would be to repeal the racially and religiously aggravated offences and rely on sentencing legislation to deal with hostility-based offending.
TL;DR: The authors compare and contrast state emergency responses to national security crises with responses deployed in a period of economic crisis, arguing that such responses are rarely temporary and instead usher in a new normalcy.
Abstract: This paper compares and contrasts state emergency responses to national security crises with responses deployed in a period of economic crisis. Specifically, this paper challenges the appropriateness and legitimacy of the standard emergency response of legislative (as distinct from judicial) deference to the executive when confronting such economic crises. This will be done by questioning the significance in periods of economic crisis of the two principal factors that justify deferring to the executive during a state of emergency pertaining to national security: (i) the necessity of the action taken; and (ii) that the executive has an expertise in decision making in the specific area in question. Ultimately, this paper questions the application of the emergency paradigm to economic crises, arguing that such responses are rarely temporary and instead usher in a ‘new normalcy’.
TL;DR: In this article, the authors draw on comparative experiences of Australian universities, which have been operating without mandatory retirement since the 1990s, to examine whether these consequences have materialised in Australia and draw out a number of lessons for UK universities from the Australian experience.
Abstract: The abolition of the default retirement age is creating challenges for UK employers, and universities in particular. Operating without mandatory retirement may have consequences for performance management, the creation of opportunities for new generations of workers, the scope for workforce planning and employment costs. Drawing on comparative experiences of Australian universities, which have been operating without mandatory retirement since the 1990s, this paper critically examines whether these consequences have materialised in Australia. It draws out a number of lessons for UK universities from the Australian experience.
TL;DR: The Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 provides protection for whistleblowers; it does not place statutory obligations on regulators to act in response to whistleblowing concerns using Freedom of Information requests as a research methodology as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: The Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 provides protection for whistleblowers; it does not place statutory obligations on regulators to act in response to whistleblowing concerns Using Freedom of Information requests as a research methodology, this paper seeks to examine how whistleblowing is approached by regulators and what happens when a whistleblowing disclosure is made Forty-eight national regulators in a variety of fields and 408 county, district and unitary local authorities with responsibility for the regulation of food were contacted The paper begins by considering the importance of whistleblowing disclosures and how they are protected in PIDA The examination of the law reveals that several organisations with important regulatory functions are not prescribed, and this has the potential to create inconsistencies in the protection of whistleblowers The bulk of the paper examines the results of the Freedom of Information requests By examining the results of these requests, it was possible to show that there are a number of inconsistencies in the way in which regulatory agencies handle concerns Several changes to practice are suggested in order to ensure that the whistleblowers receive appropriate treatment and that the concerns that they express can be properly addressed
TL;DR: The authors argue that the taxonomy debate has been flawed by two fundamental mistakes: little attention has been paid to how legal taxonomies are actually used, and both sides in the debate have misunderstood what legal concepts are, and hence tend to misuse them.
Abstract: The aim of this paper is to reframe the taxonomy debate which has, in recent years, come to dominate private law theory. We argue that the debate to date has been flawed by two fundamental mistakes. First, little attention has been paid to how legal taxonomies are actually used. This, we argue, is regrettable: how we build a taxonomy depends on why we build a taxonomy, and a clearer focus on this question produces an approach that is very different from the approaches that currently dominate private law theory. Secondly, both sides in the debate have misunderstood what legal concepts are, and hence tend to misuse them. We argue that legal concepts are Weberian ideal types, and use philosophical theories of concepts to put forward a very different understanding of how concepts acquire content and are used in the legal system. Putting these together, we argue for a far more developmental, and historically informed, approach to taxonomy and to legal concepts generally.
TL;DR: In this article, the authors consider whether the personal injury system can be thought to have a democratic justification in common beliefs in such justice, using the concept of personal justice used by Professor Robertson to provide a "meta-doctrinal" defence of the law of negligence.
Abstract: Adapting the concept of ‘interpersonal justice’ used by Professor Robertson to provide a ‘meta-doctrinal’ defence of the law of negligence, this paper asks whether the personal injury system can be thought to have a democratic justification in common beliefs in such justice. It is widely acknowledged that the gross functional inadequacy of the personal injury system makes it implausible to claim that that system can be justified on grounds of compensation or deterrence. But that inadequacy makes it equally implausible to claim that common citizens would choose that system, which exists only because it is effectively compulsory. Constructing a market in first-person insurance would put the existence of the personal injury system to the test of actual choice.
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors consider how employment laws are being used in response to what we have termed "the eldercare-workplace conundrum" and consider, drawing on various examples of legal responses in other countries that face similar conundrums.
Abstract: This paper considers how employment laws are being used in response to what we have termed ‘the eldercare–workplace conundrum’ It is well known that people are now living longer but health is still failing in a significant percentage of older people, meaning that many adults require care for longer, albeit to varying degrees and for varying amounts of time Many of these individuals will receive care from relatives or close friends who are participating in the labour market: this is increasingly likely as adults are expected or want to remain in paid work for longer, often into their sixties and seventies The requirements of elderly dependants can cause these workers huge difficulties and dilemmas as they attempt, across time, to accommodate the particular needs of the person for whom they wish to provide care, often a loved one, and meet the particular demands of their employment relationship In this paper, we consider why this is an area of social policy that warrants effective legal engagement and consider, drawing on various examples of legal responses in other countries that face similar conundrums, what might improve legal engagement in this area
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors argue that requiring knowledge may not undermine the legal conception of autonomy, giving reason to doubt that it would be unlawful to require people to have genetic information about themselves.
Abstract: Should people be required to know information about themselves that arises from their genetic test? This question is highly relevant given the NHS's plans to sequence 100,000 whole genomes before 2017. The approach to this issue in the USA generated significant opposition to requiring knowledge, on the basis that it interferes with autonomy. This piece presents a different perspective, arguing that requiring knowledge may not undermine the legal conception of autonomy, giving reason to doubt that it would be unlawful to require people to have genetic information about themselves. Following this, the piece presents an alternative principled position that might support a legal recognition of the interest in not having information about oneself; namely that of preventing personal harm. However, this approach runs into difficulties if the reasons for requiring knowledge are also based on preventing personal harm. The argument considers how interests might be balanced in this competing harms context.
TL;DR: In this paper, Fish pays homage to what can be described as the most important role of the modern public intellectual: to question over and over again what is postulated as selfevident, to disturb people's mental habits, the way they do and think things, to dissipate what is familiar and accepted, and to be opinionated, judgmental, sometimes condescending, and often waspish.
Abstract: reader, forcing her/him to reflect on where she/he stands on this rather important matter. In doing so, Fish pays homage to what can be described as the most important role of the modern public intellectual: ‘to question over and over again what is postulated as selfevident, to disturb people’s mental habits, the way they do and think things, to dissipate what is familiar and accepted’ and ‘to be opinionated, judgmental, sometimes condescending, and often waspish.’ Qualities that are all the more important when, on one analysis, universities cease being centres of critique. So, even if for no other reason, Fish’s account of academic freedom is worth reading because it is thought-provoking, engaging and humorous. After all, who else might get away with writing, with an equal measure of self-aggrandisement and self-debasement, that academics want to be downtrodden and oppressed; for ‘in the psychic economy of the academy, oppression is the sign of virtue [... making academics] indistinguishable from the faces of medieval martyrs’.
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors argue that courts should exercise structured discretion, guided by principles of distributive justice, in ascertaining the appropriate remedy in determining what remedy is apposite to provide justice in the circumstances.
Abstract: It is often said that distributive justice has no place in private law. However, distributive justice considerations feature strongly in cases involving the remedies imposed over bribes gained in breach of fiduciary duty. This paper argues that courts should exercise structured discretion, guided by principles of distributive justice, in ascertaining the appropriate remedy. The distributive factors of desert, needs and equality should inform the determination of what remedy is apposite to provide justice in the circumstances.
Journal Article•
TL;DR: Zhang et al. as mentioned in this paper developed a criminal law system in personality based on criminal personality theory, which represents progress of rationality of human criminal law, and it is also a joint strategy that crime science is combined with personality psychology and criminal psychology to face criminal phenomenon.
Abstract: Personalization of criminal law is a criminal legal system which is constructed by taking personality traits of the perpetrator as organic component of criminal motivation and criminal behavior, being a call in the crisis of contemporary criminal law and an inevitable presentation of trend evolution of criminal law. The establishment of criminal law in personality on the basis of criminal personality theory represents progress of rationality of human criminal law, and it is also a joint strategy that crime science is combined with personality psychology and criminal psychology to face criminal phenomenon. The theory of personality psychology and personality test paradigm play the role of theoretical cornerstone in establishment and development of criminal law system in personality, while the personalization of criminal law which is characterized with modern jurisprudential philosophy, personality theory and technical advancement shows its value in the whole process of conviction, sentencing and execution transformation in criminal justice, and various representative personality test paradigms and technologies will play important roles in the process of personalization of criminal law.
TL;DR: This commentary updates the paper ‘Excluding evidence (or staying proceedings) to vindicate rights in Irish and English law’ by analysing the recent decision of the Supreme Court of Ireland in DPP v JC and arguing that although the court has relaxed the exclusionary rule, it has strengthened it in others.
Abstract: This commentary updates the paper ‘Excluding evidence (or staying proceedings) to vindicate rights in Irish and English law’ by analysing the recent decision of the Supreme Court of Ireland in DPP v JC. It argues that although the court has relaxed the exclusionary rule in one major respect, it has strengthened it in others, and that Ireland's approach to unconstitutionally or illegally obtained evidence remains very different from that of England and Wales.
TL;DR: In this article, the authors argue that the anti-social behaviour, crime and policing Act 2014 will be particularly significant in this regard, and that some amendments to this legislation will be required to ensure its effective application to the problems of local environmental quality.
Abstract: Local environmental quality is best understood as a measure of the aesthetic complexion of public space in the urban environment. Anti‐social acts causing damage to the physical environment of local communities have, traditionally, attracted little moral opprobrium; and the role of local authorities in safeguarding local environmental quality has been undervalued. However, this is an issue that has been proven to have a significant impact on the quality of life of local communities, particularly those in deprived neighbourhoods. This paper argues, therefore, that we need to develop a comprehensive legal framework to safeguard local environmental quality in the future. This problem has so far been tackled as nuisance, local environmental crime or anti‐social behaviour. The paper concludes that an approach based on measures to tackle incivility in society is to be preferred; thus, the Anti‐social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 will be particularly significant in this regard. However, some amendments to this legislation will be required to ensure its effective application to the problems of local environmental quality. Further measures should also be taken to support citizen participation and education as part of a comprehensive legal framework for safeguarding the local environment.
TL;DR: It was hoped by many that, when the English Law Commission and Scottish Law Commission established their joint review of insurance contract law in 2006, the doctrine would be consigned to the proverbial dustbin of history as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: The doctrine of insurable interest grew out of eighteenth-century anxieties over fraudulent seafarers and habitual gamblers. It was created by the courts, entrenched by statute and remains in place to this day despite the fact that it serves no practical or legal purpose. It was hoped by many that, when the English Law Commission and Scottish Law Commission established their joint review of insurance contract law in 2006, the doctrine would be consigned to the proverbial dustbin of history. Eight years later, these hopes have been dashed. The doctrine is here to stay. This paper asks ‘Why’ and finds the answer to be elusive.
TL;DR: The Australian Feminist Judgments as discussed by the authors encourages this discussion, particularly through the editor's novel extensions of the feminist judgment-writing project to encompass numerous single-judge decisions, to allow imaginative deviations from the ‘brief' in key cases concerning Indigenous Australians, and to include the judgment of a male feminist judge.
Abstract: Court, Attorney General George Brandis scrupulously avoided responding to that question. While the Attorney may chose silence, Australian Feminist Judgments encourages this discussion, particularly through the editor’s novel extensions of the feminist judgment-writing project to encompass numerous single-judge decisions, to allow imaginative deviations from the ‘brief’ in key cases concerning Indigenous Australians, and to include the judgment of a male feminist judge. The Australian Feminist Judgments thus ensures that law teachers and students have fresh and stimulating material through which to interrogate these questions.