Reversing the ‘Tragedy’ of the Commons? Sustainable Management and the Commons Act 2006

The Commons Act 2006 is the first statute since the Commons Registration Act 1965 to address the problems associated with the management of common land in England and Wales. A key focus for the 2006 Act is the introduction of mechanisms for the sustainable management of common land, including self‐regulatory commons councils. This article examines the ‘sustainable’ management of common land in historical and contemporary perspective. It sets the 2006 Act, and the sustainable management of common land, in the wider context of the ongoing debate triggered by Hardin's ‘Tragedy of the Commons’ and subsequent institutional and post‐institutional scholarship on common pool resource management. It uses historical and qualitative research data drawn from three case studies to demonstrate the irrelevance of Hardin's thesis in an English context, and identifies the Commons Registration Act of 1965 as the true ‘tragedy’ of the English and Welsh commons. The case studies also illustrate the challenges posed by the introduction of legal mechanisms to promote the ecologically sustainable management of the modern commons, and inform the critique of the Commons Act 2006 developed in the article.     

The Housing and Planning Act 2016: Rewarding the Aspiration of Homeownership?

In May 2016 the Housing and Planning Act 2016 became law, the first purely Conservative government intervention on housing in England since the 1990s. This article examines the Act's key provisions pertaining to social housing and the government's stated aim of increasing rates of homeownership. The Act, through the Starter Homes Scheme, extension of the right to buy to housing association tenants and changes to security of tenure in the social sector, has been heralded as a ‘landmark’ piece of legislation. This article scrutinises these policy measures and assesses their effectiveness and likely impact. It is contended that the Act exposes the government's promotion of homeownership above all other housing tenures. The article further explores the deep moralisation at the heart of the homeownership narrative and the intensification in the residualisation of social housing in England which, it is argued, is the inevitable consequence of the reforms.     

‘Factual causation’ and ‘scope of liability’: What's the difference?

According to a dominant view, for the negligent defendant to be held liable for the plaintiff's harm the plaintiff must establish first, that the breach was the ‘factual cause’ of the harm, and second, that the harm is within the ‘scope of liability’. On this view, factual causation is purely factual, while scope of liability is normative and non‐causal. This article accepts the basic two‐step approach, but argues that the distinction is overstated. A close analysis of the principles shows that factual causation may require value judgment, and that scope of liability often involves an assessment of the strength and nature of the causal connection between breach and harm.     

The Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014: A Litany of Fundamental Flaws?

This article argues that the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 are fatally flawed notwithstanding the apparent rigour of the process which produced them. These Regulations were the product of considerable deliberation following a sensitively executed public inquiry yet, it is argued, they rely too heavily on the rhetoric of criminal law while failing to take into account the competing norms for compliance and the impact of NHS budget constraints. Further, they push the CQC towards a heavy‐handed deterrence approach to enforcement, which will increase hostility between regulatees and the inspectorate, and ultimately reduce the scope for developing the transparency about failures which is sorely needed in the NHS. This article challenges the contemporary wisdom that it is primarily knee‐jerk regulatory responses that suffer from fatal flaws of this nature.     

European Citizenship and the Right to Reside: ‘No One on the Outside has a Right to be Inside?’

This paper deals with the question: Who ought not to be excluded from the enjoyment of European citizenship rights? Recently, the Court of Justice has ruled that, in exceptional situations, the ‘genuine enjoyment of the substance of rights attaching to European citizenship’ can be invoked in order to also extend legal protection to specific categories of third country nationals. I will argue that the ‘genuine enjoyment’ formula is not only setting an innovative jurisdictional test concerning European citizenship rights, but that it is also highlighting how the traditional account of citizenship (from status to rights) can be conceptually reversed. This happens in threshold cases, where the tenability of the schema of distribution of rights, agreed within a political community, depends on the possibility to readjust the boundaries of political membership.     

Human Rights in the Council of Europe and the EU: Towards ‘Individual’, ‘Constitutional’ or ‘Institutional’ Justice?

Abstract: The European Convention on Human Rights, promulgated by the Council of Europe in 1950, is widely regarded as the world's most successful experiment in the trans‐national judicial protection of human rights. The EU's much more recent judicial and political interest in human rights has also been widely welcomed. Yet, while the crisis currently afflicting the Convention system has not gone unnoticed, the same cannot equally be said of the difficulties presented by the increasing interpenetration of the two systems. Amongst the few who have shown some interest in these problems, the dominant view is that good will and common sense will provide adequate solutions. We disagree. Instead, we detect a gathering crisis which, unless properly analysed and effectively tackled, will only deepen as the EU's interest in human rights develops further. In our view, the problem is essentially conceptual and that, ultimately, it boils down to a much‐neglected question, simple to state but not so easy to answer: is the trans‐national protection of human rights in Europe a matter of ‘individual’, ‘constitutional’ or ‘institutional’ justice?     

Improving Housing Conditions in the Private and Social Rented Sectors: The Homes (Fit for Human Habitation) Act 2018 ‐ Fit for Habitation but Fit for Purpose?

The Homes (Fit for Human Habitation) Act 2018 became law in December 2018 and entered into force on 20 March 2019. This article examines the key provisions of this significant piece of housing legislation which has the potential to transform the lives of those renting homes in both the private and social sectors in England. The 2018 Act, through amendment to the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, introduces a new obligation on landlords to ensure their residential properties are fit for human habitation and, for the first time in this jurisdiction, endows tenants with new civil rights to directly enforce this implied covenant against failing landlords. This article identifies the key deficiencies within the current legal framework around fitness for human habitation and explores how far the 2018 Act meets these challenges; set against the febrile backdrop of an acute housing crisis and the Grenfell Tower tragedy.     

‘Hermann Heller and the European Crisis: Authoritarian Liberalism Redux?’

This essay tentatively buttresses Alexander Somek's view that Hermann Heller's 1933 essay, ‘Authoritarian Liberalism’, provides a useful starting point for thinking about the ongoing European crisis, in which European authorities are favouring rigid austerity and pro‐business policies while undermining basic liberal and democratic rights. Heller's unfortunate neglect, especially in Anglophone scholarship, is discussed. Nonetheless, Somek and other recent scholars who have turned to Heller to make sense of the European crisis downplay some of the tough questions raised by any attempt to apply Heller's analysis of the Weimar crisis to the contemporary setting. In particular, Heller's theory relied on a robust social democratic statism which has become increasingly unpopular even among theorists on the political left.     

Universal Credit, ‘Positive Citizenship’, and the Working Poor: Squaring the Eternal Circle?

This article examines the potential effects of the Welfare Reform Act 2012 on the United Kingdom social security system, and on claimants. This legislation illustrates new modes of thought and ideology underlying the British welfare state. The introduction of the ‘Universal Credit’ has the potential to solve the ‘poverty trap’, where claimants are better off in receipt of welfare benefits rather than engaging with employment, and may assist low‐paid individuals into ‘positive’ citizenship. However, the practicalities of implementing Universal Credit might undermine legislators’ ambitions. It may be that the Act attempts too much reform to the social security system, trying to impose legislative uniformity on a highly complex set of socio‐economic circumstances which may be impervious to such rationalisation. This could result in the scheme requiring further reform, or even abolition. The ideological and historical underpinnings of Universal Credit are also examined to understand more clearly its nature and structure.     

What Did the Lawyers Do During the ‘War’? Neutrality,Conflict and the Culture of Quietism

Using Northern Ireland as a case study, this paper explores how lawyers responded to the challenges of entrenched discrimination, sustained political violence and an emerging peace process. Drawing upon the literature of the sociology of lawyering, it examines whether lawyers can or should be more than ‘paid technicians’ in such circumstances. It focuses in particular upon a number of ‘critical junctures’ in the legal history of the jurisdiction and uncouples key elements of the local legal culture which contributed to an ethos of quietism. The paper argues that the version of legal professionalism that emerged in Northern Ireland was contingent and socially constructed and, with notable exceptions, obfuscated a collective failure of moral courage. It concludes that facing the truth concerning past silence is fundamental to a properly embedded rule of law and a more grounded notion of what it means to be a lawyer in a conflict.     

Quest for the Holy Grail—Is a Unified Approach to the Market Freedoms and European Citizenship Justified?

The case law of the CJEU on the economic free movement of people has departed from the traditional requirement that a nexus must be established between individual free movement and cross‐border economic activity, which has led to an extension of its scope. It is submitted that concerns with the protection of fundamental rights of European citizens are driving this process, and that the CJEU has sought to protect these fundamental rights through the market freedoms in two ways: by arguing that market freedoms are fundamental right themselves, and/or that European Citizenship has changed their normative underpinnings and status. This Article criticises both lines of argument, and defends a third: that the protection of these fundamental rights must be achieved at European level, if at all, through a conception of European Citizenship able to stand on its own.     

‘Should I Stay or Should I Go ?’—A Critical Analysis of the Right to Withdraw from the EU

This article seeks to answer one of the key questions facing the EU in the future: what effect will the new right to withdraw have on the EU? Will it lead to a gradual fragmentation of what was supposed to be ‘an ever closer union of unlimited duration’? Or will it even mark the beginning of the end of the Union? In order to answer these complex questions, this article first briefly analyses the pre‐Lisbon situation regarding withdrawal. It then critically examines the newly inserted Article 50, which codifies the right to withdraw. Having done so, it will then examine whether non‐legal considerations, such as political and economic reasons, will render withdrawal a theoretical rather than realistic option.     

‘Stop the ECJ’?: An Empirical Analysis of Activism at the Court

This article uses a disaggregated approach to study the role of the Advocate General in the European Court of Justice (CJ). It presents original empirical material based upon interviews with Advocates General (AsG) and referendaires at the CJ to assess the question of activism at the Court. Using answers to specific questions, I conclude that while the AsG are entrepreneurs, neither they nor the Court can be described as ‘activist’per se.     

Buying Amendments? Lobbyists' Campaign Contributions and Microlegislation in the Creation of the Affordable Care Act

When do campaign contributions matter? This article advances the claim that a group that gives campaign contributions to US Members of Congress is more likely to achieve legislative success when (1) a single legislator can deliver to the group (2) a private benefit (3) without attracting negative attention. Using an original data set based on the written comments of nearly 900 interest groups lobbying the US Senate Finance Committee on health reform legislation in 2009, I link group requests to corresponding legislation. The analysis shows a significant relationship between lobby groups' campaign contributions and their legislative success, and at distinct units of analysis—the group, the side, and the group-senator dyad. The relationship is particularly strong in predicting senators’ amendments in committee. The rare data presented here offer compelling evidence that interest groups' legislative victories are sometimes connected to campaign contributions in a way that previous studies could not identify.     

European Human Rights Law and the Normalisation of the ‘Closed Material Procedure’: Limit or Source?

Once a legal abnormality that was criticised on human rights grounds, the closed material procedure (CMP) has now become the main mechanism for dealing with allegedly sensitive security information in the UK. This article considers the role of European human rights law in that process. It argues that the CMP can be conceptualised as the product of human rights law, which has developed so as to legalise and normalise its use, and that this process is symptomatic of a deeper inter‐relationship between human rights law and the preservation of states' security interests, which renders the former inherently unsuitable for dealing with security phenomena.     

Is Sincerity the First Virtue of Social Institutions? Police,Universities, and Free Speech

In the final chapter of Speech Matters, Seana Shiffrin argues that institutions have especially stringent duties to protect speech freedoms. In this article, I develop a few lines of criticism. First, I question whether Shiffrin’s framework of justified suspended contexts is appropriate for institutional settings. Second, I challenge the presumption that the knowledge-gathering function performed by police is necessarily compromised by insincere practices. Third, I criticize Shiffrin’s characterization of the university as involving a complete repudiation of enforced consensus, and I express doubts about the close connection between education and democratic legitimation that Shiffrin endorses. Finally, I raise a problem with the book’s overall argument: even if one agrees that speech freedoms are necessary for moral development, they also may be threatening to moral development. The upshot is that the protection of speech should be modulated in order to account for the potential conflicts between sincerity and other valuable ends, rather than being oriented above all to sincerity.

     

Falling into Line? The Hostile Environment and the Legend of the ‘Judges’ Revolt’

In 2012 the Government made a number of controversial changes to the Immigration Rules, which it claimed would ‘comprehensively reform the approach taken towards ECHR Article 8 in immigration cases’. This paper examines the judicial response, arguing that the courts ‘fell into line’, adapting human rights law to the government's aims through unprincipled and opportunistic techniques, whilst inflicting hardship and injustice on working-class British citizens in particular. Four key moves are identified. First, the courts created an ‘incapable’ test which immunised the rules from in principle challenges. Second, Lord Bingham's Article 8 test, in which the reasonableness of any family member relocation was a central consideration, was replaced with a far less family-friendly test. Third, the courts adopted an ultra-lax rationality test at common law, even when the ‘fundamental rights’ of British citizens were engaged. Finally, the courts identified immigration policy as the ‘constitutional responsibility’ of the executive.     

A case of mistaken identity: George Stigler, “The Problem of Social Cost,” and the Coase theorem

“The Problem of Social Cost” is rightly credited with helping to launch the economic analysis of law. George Stigler plays a central role in the professional reception of Coase’s work and, in particular, of the idea that came to be known as the Coase theorem. While Coase’s negotiation result was taken up in the scholarly literature not long after the publication of “The Problem of Social Cost,” it was Stigler who gave the theorem its name and introduced it to scores of readers in The Theory of Price (1966). His remaking of Coase’s idea into a “theorem” had significant rhetorical force, which, combined with the challenge that it pose to received thinking about externality problems, both lent credibility to the idea and made it a force to be reckoned with. The present paper analyzes Stigler’s various commentaries on the Coase theorem with a view to getting at both how Stigler understood the theorem and its import and why he exhibited such a fascination with it over the last 30 years of his life.