When Internet protocols and legal provisions collide: Unauthorised access and Sierra v. Ritz

This case note article examines the unreported decision of a U.S. court in Sierra Corporate Design Inc. v. David Ritz (2007) District Court, County of Cass, State of North Dakota (File No. op-05-C-01660) which deals with the unauthorised use of a domain name system zone transfer. The court ruled that access was unauthorized given the defendant's intention to obtain and divulge information found in the zone transfer.     

Restitution, Rectification, and Mitigation: Negligent Solicitors and Wills, Again

A solicitor, when drafting a will, can owe a duty of care in tort to the intended beneficiary of a bequest under that will. The Court of Appeal has recently confirmed that where a solicitor has misdrafted the will, the intended beneficiary can sometimes rectify it, and recover the intended gift. The pattern of this rectification is restitutionary, raising the question analysed in this article of whether an intended beneficiary can have a direct personal action in restitution to reverse the unjust enrichment of an unintended recipient. It seems that, though fraught, such an action may indeed in principle lie.     

原告资格判定中“保护规范说”和“实际影响说”的混用与厘清——兼评东联电线厂案再审判决

在东联电线厂案再审判决中,最高人民法院重申了刘广明案“保护规范说”的原理,但并未就产品质量法规范如何成为确定原告资格的规范充分说理。裁判认为被诉处罚已确认了产品质量处罚的要件事实,起诉人由此将可能受到产品质量行政处罚这一行政法上的不利影响。这强调了被诉处罚和产品质量行政处罚间事实上可能的因果关系,是“实际影响说”的体现。法院还指出了被诉机关线索移交的义务,并肯定了被诉处罚对于后一行政处罚的确认效力,客观上可补充因果关系的论证,但确认效力的实定法基础,以及给予预防性救济的必要性仍待证明。东联电线厂案再审判决在论证中混用了两种理论,反映了多次作为最高人民法院裁判原理的“保护规范说”的理论深度尚不足以应对疑难案件,也说明了“实际影响说”的影响力不可忽视。理论界和实务界应就我国原告资格具体疑难案件进行讨论,重视两种理论在应用中各自的发展,承认两者存在相互作用的可能,并回应来自对方角度的解释。     

Enhancing Civil Remedies for (Sexual) Harassment: s.3 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997

This commentary explores the scope and content of the Protection from Harassment Act, recently introduced in the UK, focusing in particular on s.3 which creates a civil cause of action for harassment. The author considers the strategic possibilities for feminists concerned with enhancing remedies for sexual harassment as well as the drawbacks of the Act, particularly its capacity to be deployed in a wide range of contexts not all of which necessarily promote justice or enhance civil and political rights. The author concludes by emphasising the important role of the courts in defining and delineating the scope of the Act as well as exploring the possibility of continued development of the common law principle in Wilkinson v. Downton. This revised version was published online in August 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Overreaching In Registered Land Law

Beneficial interests under a trust were not intended to be overriding interests under section 70(1)(g) of the Land Registration Act 1925. The position was altered by Williams & Glyn's Bank Ltd v Boland , which determined that an interest under a trust for sale would bind a purchaser if the beneficiary were in actual occupation. The decision raised the question whether such interests could be overreached once the beneficiary was in occupation of the trust property. City of London Building Society v Flegg held that the relevant beneficial interest had been overreached. Both decisions assume that overreaching in registered conveyancing takes effect as it does in unregistered land. Yet there is considerable evidence that the Land Registration Act contains its own overreaching machinery. The House of Lords applied the wrong overreaching provisions in Boland and Flegg and there is no legal basis on which to recognise that trust interests can override a subsequent disposition under section 70(1)(g).     

试析"悬赏办案"的危险性--从"马加爵案"悬赏想到的

由马加爵案的悬赏侦破,引出对最近各地公安机关和法院“悬赏办案”的分析,即从历史、法律、法社会学及法经济学的角度,指出这种“改革”方案的危险性倾向,并提出了建设性建议。     

Provocation and Pluralism

What is the best way to reflect human diversity in the structure of the provocation defence, and similar excusatory defences in the criminal law? The House of Lords recently concluded that the right way is to allow the jury to personalise and thereby qualify the apparently uniform ‘reasonable person’ standard mentioned in section 3 of the Homicide Act 1957. In this paper we argue that this is not the right way at all. We argue that the reasonable person standard, unqualified, already accommodates the only variations between people that the law should want to accommodate in an excusatory defence. To defend this view we revive the common law's tripartite analysis of the ‘objective’ (or impersonal) issues in the provocation defence: first, was there an action capable of constituting a provocation? second, how provocative was it? and third, how much self‐control should have been exhibited in the face of it? We show that these questions each have a built‐in sensitivity to certain variations between different defendants' situations, but that this does not detract from their objectivity (or impersonality). We argue that no more sensitivity is needed in the name of human diversity, and what is more that no more sensitivity is desirable.     

Computer based testing – Bolls v. W. Scott Street,Sec'y of Va. Bd. of Bar Exmnrs., August 11, 2009, case no. 090915

The most significant change to law licensing in the United States is the recent¹ reliance on computer-based testing for the bar exam in all of the fifty states. The following comment piece is meant to inform the computer and technology law community how the use of testing software must necessarily be accompanied by additional procedural protections and corrective processes that may not have existed previously. Chief among these is the availability of discovery of the item in question, namely in this case the essays in a computer-based bar exam, which constitutes evidence that is essential to vindicating one's rights when a software failure occurs.     

Terrorism Analysis and Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project: The Missing Element

ABSTRACT

The decision in the case of Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project raised important issues about civil liberties in the United States (2010), including freedom of speech and freedom of association, in relation to U.S. foreign policy actions. While the decision has the potential to infringe on certain liberties, the decision itself was based on very limited information on the nature of terrorism, the foreign terrorist organizations involved, and the processes by which terrorist groups can be induced to peacefully re-enter domestic political systems. There are also concerns about what can be the arbitrary designation of groups as foreign terrorist organizations. These issues raise serious questions about the role of the Supreme Court in the overall political system and judgments in cases involving terrorism and foreign policy.