Monthly Archives: November, 2024
Ellen Bublick, ‘What We Talk About When We Talk About the Duty of Care in Negligence Law: The Utah Supreme Court Sets an Example in Boynton v Kennecott Utah Copper’
ABSTRACT Every day, state common law courts define the duty of care in negligence law. There is no formula for how courts should determine duty. Yet when judges are charged with important decisions about whether to open or shut the courthouse doors to whole categories of claimants, judges need some framework for decision. This article […]
Peari and Peari, ‘Why the public might doubt the idea of unjust enrichment’
ABSTRACT Restitutionary claims are important. They are even relevant to such scenarios as restitution of improperly collected taxes and mistaken payments. However, what is the organising idea behind these claims? This question is critical for clarifying the existing law and setting the scene for legal reform. For the first time, this article empirically tests the […]
David Wilde, ‘Property not required for its trust purpose – and the concept of “general charitable intent”’
ABSTRACT This article compares the treatment of various types of trust where the settlor stipulates that trust property is to be used to pursue a particular purpose, but that purpose proves abortive, leaving the relevant property not now needed for the purpose and not otherwise disposed of. It argues that charitable trusts, and in particular […]
‘Bishop not vicariously liable for abuse by clergy’
The High Court of Australia has handed down a significant decision on the law of ‘vicarious liability’, ruling that a church body is not automatically liable for sexual assault carried out by priests or ministers, where those persons are not employed by the church. In Bird v DP (a pseudonym) [2024] HCA 41 (13 November […]
Michele Faioli, ‘Prospects on Risks, Liabilities and Artificial Intelligence, Empowering Robots at Workplace Level’
ABSTRACT The tech transformation is forcing us to rethink new solutions for mapping risks and opportunities arising from interactions between robots, empowered by AI, and workers (‘IWRs’). While doing so, we must keep in mind that the debate is not about artificial intelligence and robots, but about us, who will have to live and work […]
Michal Lavi, ‘Targeting Children: Liability for Algorithmic Recommendations’
ABSTRACT We live in the algorithmic society, characterized by massive digital surveillance and data collection by private companies exploiting human information vulnerabilities for profit. The infrastructure of free expression translates into an infrastructure of digital surveillance. This model, dubbed ‘surveillance capitalism’, includes massive personalized algorithmic targeting that departs from human speakers, allowing a level of […]
Maria Hook, ‘The Purpose of the Gateways for Service Out of the Jurisdiction’
ABSTRACT This article argues that the purpose of the English gateways for service out of the jurisdiction is to identify a presumptive meaningful connection; that courts have used different mechanisms to rebut the presumption of a meaningful connection established by the gateways; and that there are lessons to be learnt from a clearer, more explicit […]
Varghese George Thekkel, ‘The No Reflective Loss Principle is Not an Old-Fashioned Corporate Law Relic’
ABSTRACT Shareholders are not allowed to bring actions for damages due to a fall in share value or loss of dividend, which are ‘reflective’ of their company’s loss. Later, this principle also found its application to ‘reflective’ losses of employees and creditors. The Supreme Court, however, in Marex Financial v Sevilleja, unanimously held that the […]
Lindgren and Oberman, ‘Recalibrating Risk under Dobbs’
ABSTRACT Several years into the US experiment with criminalizing abortion, there is little certainty about the answers to any number of basic questions about the scope and applicability of state abortion bans. For clinicians, this uncertainty, coupled with the high stakes of criminal liability, has triggered a broad-scaled retreat from the pre-Dobbs standard of care […]
‘Rethinking Digital Privacy in Tort’
Tsachi Keren-Paz, Egalitarian Digital Privacy: Image-Based Abuse and Beyond (2023). In his excellent book, Egalitarian Digital Privacy: Image-Based Abuse and Beyond, Tsachi Keren-Paz defends a number of interesting and provocative claims about the liability of persons in relation to the distribution and viewing of intimate images whose dissemination and in some cases, production, is non-consensual, […]