Statutory interpretation, capture, and tort law: the regulatory compliance defense

The regulatory compliance defense holds firms liable whose productsor product warnings fail to satisfy federal regulatory standards,but does not exculpate firms that comply. Rather, complianceis relevant evidence for a jury to consider in a products liabilityaction. This article argues that the defense should exculpatecompliant firms as a matter of law. A Congress that thoughtabout the matter would prefer this judicial construction ofan unclear safety statute. To defend this view, the articleargues that a legislature can have intentions in a normativelymeaningful sense, that claims that a Congress or its agenciesare captured by special interests should be nonjusticiable,and that, when a court is in doubt as to what a legislatureintended, it should adopt that construction of the relevantstatute that would be easiest for the legislature to correctif the court errs. In this case, it is easier for Congress tocorrect a construction that it intended to exculpate compliantfirms than a construction that it did not.     

After Waterhouse: vicarious liability and the tort of institutional abuse

As evidence of the extent of the abuse of children in residential care increases, our understanding of this terrible wrong has altered. These assaults are an institutional syndrome, at the same time that they are individual crimes; certain systems of institutional care are conducive to/foster abuse behaviour (acting as 'crucibles' rather than 'honeypots'for rogue paedophiles). A theory of vicarious (institutional) liability is appropriate if we understand a syndrome of institutional abuse in this way, as involving institutional responsibility in addition to individual fault. The recent decision of the Canadian Supreme Court in Bazley v Curry found a children's home vicariously liable for sexual assaults of an employee on the basis of responsibility through the creation of risk, an analysis of and apportionment of liability which is appropriate to the special syndrome of institutional abuse, while encouraging deterrence and providing fair and practical compensation to victims. This analysis/liability is supported by an economic analysis of institutional child abuse and decision making in child protection.     

The changing face of protection for individual privacy against the press: Leveson,the Royal Charter and tort liability

This article evaluates two significant methods of protecting private information in the UK – via actions under the tort of misuse of private information, and via press regulation. As the Leveson Report has recently found, parts of the press have systematically abused their power, in terms of acquiring and publishing personal information non-consensually. Thus, as the Report found, it appears that the system of press self-regulation has been shown to be ineffective. The article considers the Leveson proposals for an improved system of press regulation and the current proposal of a Royal Charter. It suggests that, ideally, press regulation could work alongside the tort, tending to encourage press restraint, obviate the need for court action, and providing a remedy for those not willing or able, due to lack of resources, to go to court to seek a remedy for privacy invasion. The history of press self-regulation indicates that those results may not be achieved, but it will be argued that the current response to the Leveson Report in the form of a Royal Charter suggests otherwise.     

质疑民事诉讼征收案件受理费

在民事诉讼中,不应征收作为程序启动费的案件受理费。目前征收案件受理费的根据不足、理由不充分,导致厌讼、私力救济盛行和管辖无序等一系列消极后果,从法院的性质和法院与仲裁机构的比较来看,征收案件受理费也不具有合理性。在民事诉讼中,取消对案件受理费的征收,可以保持法院的中立和纯洁,培育民众对法院和法律的认同心理,为中国的法治建设创造更为理想的环境。     

Shame on you,John! Laws,stigmatization, and the demand for sex

The present article contributes to the literature on prostitution by shedding light on the effects of the criminalization of buying sex on the amount of prostitution bought, as well as on the proposed theoretical mechanisms underlying this change. We find indications that criminalizing the buying of sex may decrease the quantity of sex bought. While we find that stigma influences the demand for sex, we do not find that stigma increases as a result of the law. Therefore, the possible reduced quantity of sex bought is probably due to the more direct risk of getting caught.     

Australian tort law reform: statutory principles of causation and the common law

By mid-2004, Parliaments in each Australian jurisdiction will either complete or will be in the process of partial codification of the law of torts. The reforms, including those to the law of negligence, are extensive. This article focuses on codification of the law of causation as an element of the cause of action in negligence. It examines the background to "tort reform", as the process has been labelled, and discusses the common law paradigm of negligence and various approaches to causation. It then analyses and compares the causation provisions in each jurisdiction.