Standard Form Contracts as Transnational Law: Evidence from the Derivatives Markets

This paper uses new research into the derivatives markets to develop our understanding of standard form contracts as transnational law and to show how transnational law theory may be usefully informed by empirical work. Traditionally, it has been assumed that international business communities seek to avoid the courts. However, the paper shows that the national courts play a prominent role in adjudicating disputes involving derivatives. Basing the discussion on the detail of these decisions by the English courts, the paper demonstrates that adjudication does not necessarily undermine widely used standard form contracts, and that it may even reinforce practices that underpin them. This is particularly the case where there is imperfect co‐incidence between a trade association's members and a standard form contract's users. Having explored recent cases, the paper reconciles its findings with a more open and imaginative account of the role of national courts within transnational law theory.     

The Indirect Influence of Politics on Tort Liability of Public Authorities in English Law

The scope of negligence liability of public authorities in English law has undergone significant changes in the Post‐World War II period, first expanding and then, from the mid‐1980s, retracting. This article tries to explain why this happened not by focusing, as is common in most commentary on this area of law, on changing doctrinal “tests,” but rather by tying it to changes in the background political ideology. My main contention is that political change has brought about a change in the law, but that it did so by affecting the scope of the political domain, and by implication, also the scope of the legal one. More specifically, I argue that Britain's Post‐War consensus on the welfare state has enabled the courts to expand state liability in accordance with emerging notions of the welfare state without seeming to take the law into controversial territory. When Thatcher came to power, the welfare state was no longer in consensus, thus making further development of legal doctrines on welfarist lines appear politically contentious. The courts therefore reverted back to older doctrines that seemed less politically charged in the new political atmosphere of the 1980s.     

The Political Origins of English Private Law

The article seeks to explain the emergence of the view that English law contains a fundamental divide between public and private law. I propose to explain the divide, not as a conceptual distinction, grounded in the internal rationality of law, but as a response to the potential problem of political legitimacy arising from the fact that in the domain of private law courts are constantly engaged in making substantive law. That by itself shows that the divide between public and private law is politically motivated, but I further argue that the prevailing view of law among proponents of the divide revives Dicey's conception of the common law within the narrower domain of private law. Since Dicey's views are widely believed to be motivated by his political views, if I am right, this lends support to the conclusion that the views of defenders of the divide are grounded in similar political positions.     

Psychiatric injury law in England and Australia--drawing closer together?

Major differences developed between English and Australian psychiatric injury law from about 1990 onwards, particularly in "secondary victim" cases. The House of Lords endorsed the traditional restrictions of aftermath, direct perception and sudden shock, whereas the High Court of Australia adopted a more enlightened approach which relied chiefly on foreseeability of psychiatric injury. In the last five years, there are indications that the gap has narrowed a little. The English courts, first in medical negligence cases but then more generally, have shown that they are now prepared to interpret the aftermath requirement more creatively. In Australia, by contrast, the codification of the law on "mental harm" has narrowed the law in certain respects, and there is scope for further restriction in the process of statutory interpretation. This analysis assesses the significance of these developments and attempts to sum up the present position.     

法院政治功能的学理疏释

现代的法院制度与古代的相比,其区别主要不在于法院纯司法功能的变化,而在于司法与政治关系发生了实质性的嬗变。法院作为国家政治权力架构中的重要一环、法治得以实现的基本机关、民主制度的维持者与裁决者以及人民的法院,就必然要与政治发生关系,具有相应的政治功能,从而在权力分立的政治架构中,通过个案的审理与相关政治行为的判定,发挥着制约其他国家权力,规范权力运行秩序并维护宪政制度的功效。     

The impact of “empirical facts” on legal scholarship and legal research training

Lawyers have traditionally viewed law as a closed system, and doctrinal research has been the research methodology used most widely in the profession. This reflects traditional concepts of legal reasoning. There is a wealth of reliable and valid social science data available to lawyers and judges. Judges in fact often refer to general facts about the world, society, institutions and human behaviour (“empirical facts”). Legal education needs to prepare our students for this broader legal context. This paper examines how “empirical facts” are used in Australian and other common law courts. Specifically, the paper argues that there is a need for enhanced training in non-doctrinal research methodologies across the law school curriculum. This should encompass a broad introduction to social science methods, with more attention being paid to a cross-section of methodologies such as content analysis, comparative law and surveys that are best applied to law.     

Deference on Questions of Law

Contrary to the modern English position, it may be appropriate for reviewing courts to accord deference to interpretations of law rendered by administrators. There is no basis for the current strong presumption against according such deference. It is possible that the legislature intended to delegate the resolution of many questions of law to administrators, rather than to courts. Moreover, relative to administrators, courts may lack institutional competence to resolve questions of law. Courts must always police the boundaries of interpretation, in order to keep administrators in check and safeguard the rule of law, but the general presumption that the resolution of questions of law is a matter for courts should be jettisoned.     

Cross-border public care and adoption proceedings in the European Union

The free movement of persons within the EU has meant that children at risk of harm from family members may be living in a Member State of which they are not a national. The child may be made subject to legal measures under the national law of the host State for the protection of their welfare. This article explores the competence of the EU to protect children in these circumstances, and the scope of the Brussels IIa Regulation in governing jurisdiction over child protection proceedings. It discusses the difference between national child protection systems and the political controversy surrounding English law on adoption following care proceedings issued over a child who is a national of a different Member State. It suggests that further information sharing on national systems and cooperation between courts is necessary for the effectiveness of the law and to encourage understanding of legitimate variation in Member State national family law.     

The Structure of American Legal Institutions and the Diffusion of Wrongful‐Discharge Laws, 1978–1999

This article evaluates how the social structure of American legal institutions influenced the diffusion of wrongful‐discharge laws over the period 1978–1999, and it assesses whether economic or political variables influenced the diffusion process. The results are surprising and quite striking. Precedents by other courts within the same federal circuit region were generally more influential in the diffusion process than precedents by courts in neighboring states or by courts within the same census or West legal reporting region, even though the precedents were on matters of state law rather than federal law and the decisions were usually made by state courts rather than federal courts. There is some limited evidence that political variables may also have been a factor, but economic variables were not statistically significant, even though the new employment laws may have had important economic consequences.     

English Matrimonial Law on the Eve of Reform (1828–57)

The ecclesiastical courts, which until 1857 administered English matrimonial law, could not dissolve marriages, but they had important powers, including the power to decree a permanent separation, to order payment of alimony, to make an order for restitution of conjugal rights, and to annul a marriage on certain restricted grounds. The work of these courts deserves attention: though the amount of litigation was, by later standards, comparatively small, this is not a reliable indication that the influence of the law was slight; moreover, the ecclesiastical courts often showed considerable sympathy with the interests of women, inclining to some extent in their favour on several important points of law and practice.     

Aboriginal oral testimony,hearsay rule and the reception theory of admissibility

Aboriginal peoples title claims are presumed upon spatial and time connections to the lands of their ancestors. In making their submissions, litigants have to circumvent the rule against hearsay and rely upon oral narratives to substantiate their claims of customary ties to land. The obstacles they face is that evidence based on informal anecdotes can cause problems in common law courts, which have long been dependent on textual evidence for probative value. In many Native cultures the idea of time is cyclical, while in the Judeo-Christian calendar time is linear. There is also the fact that oral narratives cannot be viewed in the abstract and the histories are closely linked to inter-generational continuity. The perspective of a narrator is relevant as the sources are often repositories of observation, knowledge and personal belief rather than clear factual understanding of the issue involved. This paper argues for the receptive theory of oral evidence to be adopted in common law courts, which would lead to a fair hearing of Aboriginal claims to land title in Australian and Canadian courts. The paper will distinguish the courts’ current approach to oral testimony submitted by aboriginal people and raise the possibility of an integrated approach based on the recourse to ‘episteme’, which is the appreciation derived from synthesis that accepts that several methodologies may exist and interact at the same time by being parts of various knowledge systems.     

United States' and Australian principles on internet jurisdiction: A case for Australia to consider United States' hegemony on jurisdiction

The United States and Australia have been facing the issue of internet jurisdiction. The United States is an epitome of a country that has considered the challenges posed by the internet to the traditional law. It has developed its own tests to help resolve the issue, which have evolved over time and in comparison with other jurisdictions, and it has been successful. Conversely, the Australian legal system is in a stage of infancy regarding such challenges and has developed its own approach. This paper focuses on the anomalies between the United States' and Australian principles or approaches to internet jurisdiction by analysing and discussing the three leading cases that are benchmarks in the respective jurisdictions. Finding the fundamental difference between the two approaches, the paper elucidates the United States hegemony on internet jurisdiction by comparing the shortcomings of the respective cases. Finally, this paper makes a case for the Australian courts to consider an approach based on the one practised by the United States courts to tackle the ever-evolving issue of internet jurisdiction.     

Deciding about life-support: a perspective on the ethical and legal framework in the United Kingdom and Australia

This article is concerned with the legal right of health service providers to decide whether to provide life-prolonging treatment to patients. In particular, an examination of recent decisions by the English Court of Appeal in R (Burke) v General Medical Council (Official Solicitor and Others Intervening) [2005] EWCA Civ 1003 and the European Court of Human Rights in Burke v United Kingdom (unreported, ECHR, No 19807/06, 11 July 2006) is provided. An analysis of Australian case law is undertaken together with a consideration of the limits of a patient's legal right of autonomy in relation to choosing life-prolonging medical treatment; the basis upon which such treatment can be legally withdrawn or withheld from an incompetent patient against the patient's earlier expressed wishes that it should be continued or initiated; the concept in ethics and law of a patient's best interests; and the role of courts in adjudicating disputes about the continuation of treatment in light of the recent decisions.     

Courting Custom: Regulating Access to Justice in Rural South Africa and Malawi

The continued relevance of customary law for the regulation of the daily lives of Africa's citizens poses serious governance challenges to sovereign states, such as how best to regulate customary dispute settlement. While confronted with largely similar problems, the South African government proposed to enhance and regulate the position of its traditional courts, whereas Malawi has opted for the creation of hybrid local courts that combine characteristics of regular state courts and customary fora to be the main avenue of customary law cases. This paper analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of both approaches and displays how the two countries’ historical and political contexts enable and constrain their regulatory choices in the field of customary dispute settlement, as well as influence the risk and benefits of the various options. In this respect, the political power of the traditional leaders is a significant determinant.     

Institutional Paths to Policy Change: Judicial Versus Nonjudicial Repeal of Sodomy Laws

What variables lead judicial and nonjudicial decision‐making bodies to introduce policy change? In the theoretical framework proposed, the path‐dependent nature of law has a differential impact on courts and legislatures. Likewise, certain political institutions including elections and political accountability lead those bodies to introduce policy change under dissimilar circumstances. Global trends, however, affect both institutional paths equally. We test this theory with data for the repeal of sodomy laws in all countries from 1972–2002. Results from two disparate multivariate models overwhelmingly confirm our predictions. The unique institutional position of courts of last resort allows them to be less constrained than legislatures by either legal status quo or political accountability. Globalization, on the other hand, has a comparable effect on both. This work is path breaking in offering a theoretical framework explaining policy change via different institutional paths, systematically testing the framework comparatively and with respect to a policy issue still on the agenda in many countries.     

‘Playing the Judicial Card’: Litigation Strategies during the Process of Ratification of the Lisbon Treaty

During the process of ratification of the Lisbon Treaty, a number of constitutional jurisdictions were activated by political actors. In playing ‘the judicial card’, opponents of ratification decided to seek political goals through judicial means, and thus they were obliged to develop litigation strategies. This article explores such strategies and the responses that courts gave them. It shows that constitutional proceedings with regards to the Lisbon Treaty became a political battleground governed by legal logics, in which the interpretation of European clauses, the democratic deficit of the Union and the tensions underlying the European judicial dialogue were privileged objects of discussion between claimants and courts in which law and politics intertwined.     

英国国际民事诉讼法三题--以《布鲁塞尔公约为主线

传票、非方便法院原则和禁诉命令是英国国际民事诉讼法中比较有特色的三项制度.体现大陆法系传统的<布鲁塞尔公约>在以判例法为主的英国的实施及其相关判例,展现了各自的法律特征及发展趋势.英国法院在公约的框架之下,不断协调两大法系民商事领域的法律冲突,求同存异,并且形成了颇具特色的国际民事诉讼法体系.     

Law and American Political Development

This essay reviews the recent volume edited by Ronald Kahn and Ken I. Kersch, The Supreme Court and American Political Development (2006), as well as the broader literature by law scholars interested in American Political Development (APD). The Law and APD literature has advanced our knowledge about courts by placing attention on the importance of executive and legislative actors, and by providing political context to our understanding of judicial decision making. But this knowledge would be more powerful if it would embrace the broader APD field's orientation toward the importance of state and institutional autonomy for understanding politics and political change. Law and APD scholars could go further in examining the ways in which courts and judges act institutionally, and how the legal branch as an institution impacts American politics and state-building. In doing so, Law and APD scholars would contribute not only to our understanding of judicial decision making but also to our understanding of the place and importance of courts in American politics.     

Taking Disagreement Seriously: Courts, Legislatures and the Reform of Tort Law

This article explores the relevance of disagreement about valuesand about the functions and effects of law to debates concerningthe appropriate relationship between courts and legislatures,common law and statute. Recent developments in tort law providea context for the discussion. The argument is that in general,political processes of law-making should be preferred judicialprocesses.     

Boycott,Resistance and the Law: Cause Lawyering in Conflict and Authoritarianism

This article examines the role of cause lawyers in conflicted or authoritarian contexts where the chances of legal victory are often minimal. Drawing upon the literature on resistance, performance, memory studies, legal consciousness and the sociology of lawyers, the paper examines how cause lawyers challenge and subvert power. The paper first explores the tactics and strategies of cause lawyers who boycott legal proceedings and the relationship between such boycotts and broader political struggles, legitimacy and law. It then examines why and how cause lawyers engage in fairly hopeless legal struggles as acts of instrumental resistance (the ‘sand in the cogs’), transforming courts into sites of symbolic resistance, and using law as a form of memory work. The paper argues that boycott of and resistance through the courts can counter the use of law as an instrument of wickedness and a tool of denial and preserves a ‘stubborn optimism’ in the rule of law.