Monthly Archives: October, 2020

‘Causation in insurance law – a new interpretation?’

“The High Court in Financial Conduct Authority v Arch Insurance (UK) Ltd [2020] EWHC 2448 (Comm) have provided much needed guidance on business interruption insurance. Within the judgment was analysis on the law of causation for insurance policies. The decision may be perceived as, at best, widening the approach when undertaking the ‘but for’ test, […]

Land and Nesselhauf, ‘Business and Human Rights Approaches to Intellectual Property’

ABSTRACT The relationship between business activity and human rights in the context of intellectual property (IP) is unique in several respects. First, it is an example of how national efforts to control the human rights impact of business activities can be frustrated by international agreements. Thus, the obligation under the UN Guiding Principles on Business […]

‘Deontological Ethics’

“The word deontology derives from the Greek words for duty (deon) and science (or study) of (logos). In contemporary moral philosophy, deontology is one of those kinds of normative theories regarding which choices are morally required, forbidden, or permitted. In other words, deontology falls within the domain of moral theories that guide and assess our […]

Horton and Weisbord, ‘Probate Lending: Data From San Francisco’

ABSTRACT Recently, ‘probate lenders’ have started to advance cash to heirs and beneficiaries in return for part of their interest in a pending decedent’s estate. This Article advances our understanding of this phenomenon by analyzing an original dataset of 1,119 probate matters from San Francisco. Capitalizing on a California statute that requires probate lenders to […]

Felipe Jiménez, ‘Rethinking Contract Remedies’

ABSTRACT This Article offers a theoretical framework for thinking about contract remedies. The argument starts from the distinction between rights and remedies in contract law. The distinction is consistent with the doctrinal structure of contract law in Western legal systems, and with the available empirical evidence regarding contractual parties’ expectations. Because they tend to downplay […]

‘Fried and Wang on Short-termism in the EU’

“Are you as tired of the short-termism debate as I am? But the beat goes on and there is an interesting new paper from Harvard law professor Jesse Fried and Harvard business professor Charles Wang on short-termism in the EU …” (more) [ProfessorBainbridge.com, 29 October]

Adolfo Giuliani, ‘After Comparative Legal History: From Case-Law to Info-Law’

ABSTRACT The 1930-60s saw the beginning of a fertile stream of research based on a historical-comparative methodology focused on case-law viewed as the paradigm of the true living law. Today, the new frontier is in the information age and in thinking law as information. Giuliani, Adolfo, After Comparative Legal History: From Case-Law to Info-Law (September […]

Ellen Smith Yost, ‘Tweet, Post, Share … Get Haled into Court? Calder Minimum Contacts Analysis in Social Media Defamation Cases’

ABSTRACT Modern communication has been transformed by ubiquitous social media platforms and near-universal connectivity. Any individual, from any location, can now publish speech to thousands or potentially millions of readers, viewers, or listeners via Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, YouTube, and other social media platforms. For this reason, defamation claims based on social media content are […]

Timothy Pilkington, ‘Failure of Condition or Implied Term?’

ABSTRACT In Barton v Gwyn‐Jones the Court of Appeal considered the remedies available to a service provider who performed services pursuant to a contract that expressly stated that they were entitled to payment of a specified sum if the services led to a particular result, but did not expressly state whether the service provider was […]

‘New Judgment: Stoffel and Co v Grondona [2020] UKSC 42’

“The Supreme Court unanimously dismissed the appeal concerning whether the Court of Appeal had erred in its application of the Patel v Mirza guidelines. Consequently, the respondent’s claim was not barred by the illegality defence. The respondent had had a business connection with Mr Mitchell. She agreed with Mr Mitchell in writing to provide her […]