The Negligence Liability of Public Authorities offers a thorough account of the law on the neglience liability of public authorities, providing practical guidance as well as a clear analysis of this developing area. It examines the case law in a range of areas, including many new cases decided since the publication of the first edition

La 4ème de couv. indique : ""The papers published here are "discussion papers" that were submitted at one of three discussion forums held in 2018. The papers, written by prominent scholars from three different continents, offer unique perspectives on free speech and privacy issues. One forum, the Free Speech Discussion Forum, was held in Luxembourg in June 2018. This forum focused on two topics: "Free Speech and Democracies" and "The Media's Role and Relevance in the Internet Era." The second forum, the Privacy Discussion Forum, was held in Paris, France, also in June 2018. This forum involved an examination of privacy issues from a multi-disciplinary perspective. Participants were given the freedom to look at such diverse topics as the Google Spain decision on the right to be forgotten, the Snowden revelations, the WikiLeaks disclosures, the Panama Papers and the Paradise Papers. Participating scholars could also choose to look at media intrusions on individual autonomy, as well as governmental and private uses of information (not only collection issues, but also distribution and use issues). They could also look at the challenges (and benefits) to privacy created by the internet. The third forum, the Free Speech/Criminal Law Discussion Forum, was held in Louisville, Kentucky, in December 2018. That forum focused on two topics: recent controversies regarding free speech and criminal law and the intersection free speech and crime"

Présentation sur le site de l'éditeur : "Product Liability is a recognised authority in the field and covers the product liability laws through which manufacturers, retailers, and others may be held liable to compensate persons who are injured, or who incur financial loss, when the products which they manufacture or sell are defective or not fit for their purpose. Product defects may originate in the production process, be one of design, or be grounded in a failure to issue an adequate warning or directions for safe use and practitioners advising business clients or claimants will find this book provides all the necessary information for practitioners to manage a product liability claim.This new edition has been fully updated to take account of 10 years of development in case law and regulation, and the increasing impact of cross-border and transnational sale of goods. The Court of Justice of the European Union handed down major rulings concerning the Product Liability Directive which affect the application of the Directive and national arrangements and Fairgrieve and Goldberg examines this in detail. For any legal practitioner operating in areas which require knowledge of European product liability law, an understanding of the impact of recent developments is essential and this work is an essential resource for practitioners working on product liability, sale of goods, personal injury and negligence.The work provides comprehensive coverage of the law of negligence as it applies to product liability, of the strict liability provisions of the Consumer Protection Act 1987, and of the EU's Product Liability Directive on which the Act is based. Although the majority of cases involve pharmaceuticals and medical devices, in recent English cases the allegedly defective products have been as diverse as a child's buggy, an All Terrain Vehicle, and even a coffee cup. Many cases are brought as group actions, and the book examines the rights of those who are injured by defective products.As well as considering the perspective of the law as it has developed in the UK, this edition contains detailed discussion of case law from other jurisdictions including the USA, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, France and Germany. The coverage in the work is complemented by a full analysis of issues which arise in transnational litigation involving problems of jurisdiction and the choice of laws."

Présentation de l'éditeur : "Whether, and in what circumstances, public authorities should be held liable for negligence in the performance of their public functions is a highly complex area of the law. Written by Cherie Blair and Dan Squires QC, the first edition of The Negligence Liability of Public Authorities provided a much needed guide to these complexities and offered a detailed account of the law for practitioners and academics.This second edition builds on the reputation of the first, including full coverage of the many important cases which have been decided since 2006. Divided into two parts, Part I focuses on the extent to which the public nature of a defendant affects civil liability and the principles that govern and limit that liability. Part II considers the law as it impacts upon specific areas of public authorities' activities. It examines cases in a range of key areas, including the police, social services, highways, education, and the emergency services and aims to set out in a comprehensive way the different legal issues that have arisen in each area. By examining cases in a variety of jurisdictions, including Australia, Canada, South Africa, New Zealand and the USA, the authors further broaden the scope of this authoritative text. The book also identifies the underlying principles and policy arguments which have shaped the law more generally, making it an extremely useful resource for a wide variety of practitioners."

A critical analysis of the use of comparative and foreign law by courts across the globe, this book provides an inclusive, coherent, and practical analysis of comparative reasoning in the forensic process

la 4e de couv. indique : "Administrative structures and administrative processes vary considerably from nation. In some instances, these differences are attributable to history (e.g., in France, all roads lead to the French revolution). In other instances, they can be traced to differences in governmental structure (e.g., the U.S. governmental structure which is based on Montesquiean notions of separation of powers). The articles in this book reflect on the administrative structures, in various countries. The papers include discussions of several European countries (including Italy, Sweden, and Denmark) as well as the United States and Australia. The papers printed here are discussion papers that were presented during discussions at the Université Paris Dauphine PSL Research University in June of 2017. At the forum, there were three primary discussion topics: "Forms of administrative Justice", "Executive Administrative Authority and decisionmaking", and "Administrative Issues Arising in Your Nation That Others Should Know About."

Présentation de l'éditeur : "This book provides a comparative study of contract law, examining the interaction of common law and civil law approaches to contract law. Drawing extensively upon English, French and European law, the book explores how the law of contract of Jersey, Channel Islands, has been influenced by both civil law and common law sources. It is argued that this jurisdiction is a striking example of comparative law in action, given that Jersey contract law is made up of a blend of common law and civil law approaches. Jersey law is premised upon a subjective approach to contracts, in which civil law concepts such as cause (rather than consideration) and vices de consentement are the foundational aspects, but is nonetheless highly influenced by the common law in areas such as remedies (damages, termination, etc). The book analyses a series of key issues from a comparative and European perspective, including the principles underlying contract law (comparing and contrasting civil and common law approaches), the formation of contract, requirements of reciprocity (cause vs consideration), the structure and approach of precontractual liability, the role of good faith in a mixed system, the architecture of remedies, and more."

Présentation de l'éditeur : "While the role of comparative law in the courts was previously only an exception, foreign sources are now increasingly becoming a source of law in regular use in supreme and constitutional courts. There is considerable variation between the practices of courts and the role of comparative law, and methods remain controversial. In the US, the issue has been one of intense public debate and it is still one of the major dividing issues in the discussion about the role of the courts. Contributing to the existing discussion of the use of comparative law in the courts, this book provides an inclusive, coherent, and practical analysis of the relevant law and jurisprudence in comparative law in the courts. It examines the consequences for court procedures and the form of judgments, as well as how foreign sources are drawn upon in private international law, European law, administrative law, and constitutional law as well as before general courts. The book also includes case studies of comparative law used in particular spheres of the law, such as tort law and consumer law. Written by practising judges and lawyers as well as leading academics, this book serves as a central reference point concerning the role of comparative law before the courts."

Présentation de l'éditeur : "An expert analysis of the relevant law and jurisprudence in mass litigation, this edited work examines the diverse and complex transnational considerations and issues of collective redress. With contributions from distinguished and authoritative commentators on this topic, the coverage is broad, thorough, and practically focused. The book offers new perspectives on the challenges of collective redress as it innovatively combines a comparative and cross border approach. Organized clearly into sections, it provides in-depth comment on these challenges from a national, European, and global perspective. With detailed analysis of the relevant law and jurisprudence in this area offering a significant practical impact, this book also examines possible solutions to the challenges identified, covering important topics and issues within collective redress mechanisms; the private international law perspective on collective redress; reception of foreign collective redress; and extraterritoriality and US law. Including contributions from the jurisdictions most relevant to these conflict of laws issues, this book unites global expertise to provide information on a complex topic and offer a solution-based approach to the collective redress landscape."

Présentation de l'éditeur : "Public procurement represents more than 15 per cent of European GDP and is one of the fastest growing sectors of the European economy. Public procurement law is also developing rapidly, not least in the area of remedies for breach of procurement rules. The aim of this book is to analyse the remedy of damages in public procurement law. The European Directive of 11 December 2007 amending Council Directives 89/665/EEC and 92/13/EEC has reaffirmed the importance of damages as a tool to enforce the proper award of public contracts, but has left the exact architecture of the damages remedy in the hands of the Member States. This book offers an overview of damages liability which is inclusive, coherent and practical, covering the relevant law and jurisprudence from a number of countries across Europe and further afield. The contributors are high-profile and authoritative commentators on public procurement law, including policy-makers, judges, academics and practitioners."

Tom Bingham is among the most influential judges of the 20th century. This volume collects around 50 essays from colleagues and those influenced by Lord Bingham, from across academia and legal practice. The essays survey Lord Bingham's pivotal role in the transformations that have taken place in the legal system during his career

Fairgrieve Duncan, De Souza Rodney. Franz Werro, Vernon Valentine Palmer. The Boundaries of Strict Liability in European Tort Law. In: Revue internationale de droit comparé. Vol. 57 N°4,2005. pp. 1106-1108.

Fairgrieve Duncan. State Liability in Tort. A comparative Law Study. In: Revue internationale de droit comparé. Vol. 55 N°4, Octobre-décembre 2003. pp. 1001-1002.

Fairgrieve Duncan. John Bell, David J. Ibbetson (dir.). -European Legal Development, The Case of Tort, 2012. In: Revue internationale de droit comparé. Vol. 65 N°4,2013. pp. 1002-1005.

Colloque organisé par le CR2D, Paris Dauphine dans le cadre du 150ème anniversaire de l’Association de droit international - International Law Association

Organised by the University of Oslo – Faculty of Law and PluriCourts, Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne – IREDIES, University of Strasbourg - CEIE, Høgskolen i Innlandet (Lillehammer), IUCN World Commission on Environmental Law, and Centre Universitair

Organisé par le Centre de Recherches en Etudes Anglophones (CREA), le groupe Observatoire de l'Aire Britannique et le Centre d’études juridiques européennes et comparées (CEJEC), avec le soutien du Centre de Recherches en Civilisation Britannique (CRECIB)

Colloque organisé par le Conseil d’Etat en partenariat avec l’Ordre des avocats au Conseil d’État et à la Cour de cassation dans le cadre des Entretiens du Contentieux du Conseil d’État.

Colloque virtuel organisé par Vanessa Barbé, professeur de droit public (UPHF) et Christina Koumpli, maître de conférences (Avignon Université).

Organisée par l'Université Paris Nanterre et le CREA - Centre de recherches anglophones.

Organisé en collaboration avec Stanford Law School et l' Université de Tilburg

Le système juridique repose sur un paradigme constitutionnel. La dialectique entre la doctrine, le constituant et le juge renforce le consensus dominant qui constitue ce paradigme. La puissance de ces convictions partagées implique que le passage d'un paradigme à un autre se fait par le biais d'un processus révolutionnaire. Lorsque survient une crise, une rupture révolutionnaire peut bouleverser l'ordre constitutionnel établi. Si cette révolution réussi un nouveau modèle paradigmatique, accepté par la majorité des acteurs juridiques, se substitue à l'ancien. L'analyse détaillée d'un tel processus de substitution de paradigme en droit constitutionnel a rarement été faite. L'étude comparée du passage du paradigme de la suprématie législative à celui de la suprématie constitutionnelle, en France, en Israël et au Royaume-Uni en est une excellente illustration. Dans ces trois pays, la crise du paradigme de la suprématie législative a conduit les juges à adopter des décisions révolutionnaires qui renversent ces systèmes initialement construits sur le modèle de la toute-puissance parlementaire. La décision Liberté d'association du Conseil constitutionnel, l'arrêt Mizrahi Bank de la Cour suprême israélienne et l'arrêt Factortame de la Chambre des Lords forment le point de départ du processus révolutionnaire qui a conduit à l'établissement du nouveau paradigme de la suprématie constitutionnelle. L'acceptation de ces décisions juridictionnelles par les constitutionnalistes et parfois leur validation par le constituant, a contribué à la mise en place du nouveau consensus, qui repose sur la garantie de normes constitutionnelles par les juges.

Le système juridique repose sur un paradigme constitutionnel. La dialectique entre la doctrine, le constituant et le juge renforce le consensus dominant qui constitue ce paradigme. La puissance de ces convictions partagées implique que le passage d'un paradigme à un autre se fait par le biais d'un processus révolutionnaire. Lorsque survient une crise, une rupture révolutionnaire peut bouleverser l'ordre constitutionnel établi. Si cette révolution réussi un nouveau modèle paradigmatique, accepté par la majorité des acteurs juridiques, se substitue à l'ancien. L'analyse détaillée d'un tel processus de substitution de paradigme en droit constitutionnel a rarement été faite. L'étude comparée du passage du paradigme de la suprématie législative à celui de la suprématie constitutionnelle, en France, en Israël et au Royaume-Uni en est une excellente illustration. Dans ces trois pays, la crise du paradigme de la suprématie législative a conduit les juges à adopter des décisions révolutionnaires qui renversent ces systèmes initialement construits sur le modèle de la toute-puissance parlementaire. La décision Liberté d'association du Conseil constitutionnel, l'arrêt Mizrahi Bank de la Cour suprême israélienne et l'arrêt Factortame de la Chambre des Lords forment le point de départ du processus révolutionnaire qui a conduit à l'établissement du nouveau paradigme de la suprématie constitutionnelle. L'acceptation de ces décisions juridictionnelles par les constitutionnalistes et parfois leur validation par le constituant, a contribué à la mise en place du nouveau consensus, qui repose sur la garantie de normes constitutionnelles par les juges.

En principe, le droit de la responsabilité civile impose que la preuve de la causalité soit à la charge du demandeur. Cette charge peut s’avérer extrêmement lourde pour d’éventuelles victimes, lorsqu’il existe une incertitude scientifique empêchant simultanément la démonstration et l’exclusion de la causalité. La causalité fait l’objet de plusieurs théories ayant vocation à en proposer une définition unitaire. Pourtant, elle peut être fractionnée en plusieurs éléments bien distincts. Ainsi, la causalité est tantôt purement factuelle, tantôt juridicisée. De plus, elle existe entre différentes sortes de faits. La causalité n’est pas la même selon que l’on observe le rattachement entre un type d’évènement et un type d’effets à l’échelle scientifique et générale, ou que l’on observe le rattachement entre un fait spécifique et une conséquence particulière dans une situation individuelle. L’objectif de cette étude est de mettre en lumière que l’incertitude scientifique survient au stade de l’appréciation de la causalité générale, ce qui constitue un frein à l’établissement des autres étapes de la recherche causale, lors de l’observation d’un cas spécifique. L’incertitude scientifique existe toutefois elle aussi de manière plurale : elle peut consister en une absence radicale d’accès à la connaissance de la causalité générale, ou en une connaissance imparfaite et probabiliste de cette dernière. Une typologie des différents cas d’incertitude scientifique et de leurs modes de résolution sera proposée, à l’aune de la confrontation entre les droits français, anglais et américain.

C’est en s’appuyant sur des documents confidentiels de la vie des affaires que cette thèse analyse, de manière comparée (droits français et anglais), la bonne foi dans le contrat. L’auteur définit la bonne foi comme un outil de « fiabilité », c’est-à-dire une garantie de confiance qui fournit une protection contre les risques contractuels. C’est à cette définition qu’est consacrée la première partie de la thèse, tandis que la seconde s’intéresse aux modulations de la bonne foi selon ces risques.