Monthly Archives: July, 2025
Kathryn Judge, ‘The Changing Architecture of Trust’
ABSTRACT Trust has always been vital to the healthy functioning of financial markets and the stability of the financial institutions. The mix of public and private institutions that undergird this trust, however, can vary. Often these forces are ignored or taken for granted until something goes wrong. With a marked turn toward deregulation taking hold […]
Nicholas Emanuel, ‘Duty To Protect: Updating Law Enforcement Tort Liability To Align With Contemporary Standards’
ABSTRACT Can civil tort law make law enforcement services safer and more effective? The purpose of tort law is to protect the public by imposing an obligation to act responsibly and avoid causing harm to others. But tort law is generally inapplicable to the profession of policing because of the public duty doctrine, the theory […]
Piotr Alexandrowicz, ‘Early modern comparative contract law’
ABSTRACT Contract law was one of the main subjects discussed in the early modern legal genre of differentiae iuris civilis et canonici (‘differences between civil and canon law’). Similar topics were covered in both late medieval and early modern differentiae – hence this genre offers a good opportunity for comparative historical research dedicated to selected […]
‘The Antagonistic Unity of Copyright and Freedom of the Arts’
On 17 June 2025, Advocate General Emiliou delivered his opinion in the second referral of the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) to the CJEU in the case ‘Pelham’ – also known as ‘Metall auf Metall’ (Case C-590/23). He defines ‘pastiche’ – currently the most controversial concept of European copyright law – and makes a […]
Mondoh and Gwele, ‘When Code Creates Duty: The Tulip Trading Case and the Future of Liability in Web3 and Blockchain Networks’
ABSTRACT The Tulip Trading litigation addresses whether software developers who maintain Bitcoin networks may owe fiduciary or tortious duties to cryptocurrency owners. This question sits at the intersection of law and technology, thus raising issues about decentralisation, the scope of fiduciary obligations, the possibility of tortious duties, and the adaptability of common law to new […]
Devenney and Howells, ‘Developing product liability networks for AI systems in the medical context’
ABSTRACT Product liability is again a matter of contemporary discussion due to the increased integration of technology into products. In particular, artificial intelligence (AI) has come to the fore, with machines, for example, using big data to make decisions faster and often with greater accuracy than humans. AI is being used at all stages of […]
Birju Kotecha, ‘The narrow(ing) scope of duty: clinical negligence and secondary victims after Paul and others v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust’
ABSTRACT In Paul and others v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust the United Kingdom Supreme Court (UKSC) held that a doctor who negligently misdiagnoses a patient does not owe a duty to family members who witness their death or injury. Such claimant witnesses – or ‘secondary victims’ – have hitherto been able to claim for psychiatric […]
Vols and Mohammadi, ‘The Right to Property in the ECHR: An Exploratory Data Science Analysis’
ABSTRACT Article 1 of the First Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights (FP ECHR) ensures the right to the peaceful enjoyment of possessions, which has been the focus of considerable litigation. This paper intends to address the deficiency in a detailed analysis of Article 1 FP ECHR cases by employing data science methods, […]
Richard Wright, ‘Legal Proof: Warranted Degrees of Belief (Not Statistical/Mathematical Probability)’
ABSTRACT Considerable confusion exists, especially in common law jurisdictions, regarding the required standards of legal proof. In Evidence Matters, Susan Haack, focusing on legal doctrine and practice in the United States, explains that the confusion stems from a misunderstanding of the standards of proof as being based on probability in the sense of statistical frequency […]
Andrew Budzinski, ‘Power and Equity in Pro Se Procedure’
ABSTRACT State courts across the country hear 95% of civil claims each year. Each state has its own unique rules of civil procedure, which often vary by courthouse and case type. Those rules are typically premised on an adversarial dynamic with parties represented by lawyers. Yet in courts resolving critical disputes about housing, family, and […]