DOCSLIB.ORG

Private International Law: Choice of Law in Tort and Delict

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Private International Law: Choice of Law in Tort and Delict The Law Commission Working Paper No. 87 and The Scottish Law Commission Consultative Memorandum No. 62 Private International Law 2 Choice of Law in Tort and Delict LONDON H ER MAJ ESTY 'S STAT10 N ERY 0 F FIC E f6.25 net The Law Commission and the Scottish Law Commission were set up by the Law Commissions Act 1965 for the purpose of promoting the reform of the law I The Law Commissioners are: .'. The Honourable Mr Justice Ralph Gibson, Chairman Mr Brian Davenport, Q.C. Professor Julian Farrand Mrs Brenda Hoggett Dr Peter North Thesecretaryof theLawCommission isMrJ.G.H.Gassonandits offices are at Conquest House, 37-38 John Street, Theobald's Road, London, WC1 N 2BQ. The Scottish Law Commissioners are: The Honourable Lord Maxwell, Chairman Mr R. D. D. Bertram, W.S. Dr E. M. Clive Mr. J. Murray, Q.C. Sheriff C. G. B. Nicholson, Q.C. The Secretary of the Scottish Law Commission is Mr R. Eadie and its offices are at 140 Causewayside. Edinburgh, EH9 1 PR. This consultation paper, completed for publication on 28 September 1984, is circulated for comment and criticism only. It does not rewesent the final views of the two Law Commissions. I The Law Commissions would be grateful for comments on the consultation paper before 16 July 1985 All correspondence should be addressed to MrR J Dormer MissJ McLeod Law Cornmission or Scottish Law Commission Conquest House 140 Causewayside 37-38 John Street Edinburgh EH9 1 PR Theobald's Road London WC1 N 2BQ (Tel 01-242 0861, ext 227) (Tet 031-668 2131, ext 25) The Law Commission Working Paper No. 87 and The Scottish Law Commission Consultative Memorandum No. 62 Private International Law Choice of Law in Tort and Delict LONDON HER MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE ' ' @Crown copyright 1984 First published 1984 ' ISBN 0 11 730168 X 393-1 27-01 L6 1 /258/4C THE LAW COMMISSION Working Paper No. 87 AND THE SCOTTISH LAW COMMISSION Consultative Memorandum No. 62 PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW CHOICE OF LAW IN TORT AND DELICT TABLE OF CONTENTS Paragraphs & PART I - INTRODUCTION 1 A. The problem described 1.1 - 1.5 1 B. The origin of this project 1.6 4 C. Preparation of this paper 1.7 - 1.8 5 D. Structure of this paper 1.9 - 1.10 5 PART I1 - THE PRESENT LAW 7 General Introduction 2.1 7 The law of England and Wales and of Northern Ireland 2.2 - 2.36 7 A. Introduction 2.2 - 2.3 7 B. The general rule: Phillips v. Eyre 2.4 - 2.22 8 1. The emergence of the general rule 2.4 - 2.7 8 2. The general rule in more detail 2.8 - 2.21 10 (a) The first limb of the general ' rule 2.8 - 2.13 10 (b) The second limb of the general rule 2.14 - 2.21 I5 3. Summary 2.22 20 (iii) Paragraphs & C. An exception to the general rule: v. Chaplin 2.23 - 2.36 20 1. When will the exception be used? 2.23 - 2.27 20 2. The nature of the exception 2.28 - 2.36 23 The law of Scotland 2.37 - 2.46 28 Torts or delicts committed in a single jurisdiction within the United Kingdom 2.47 - 2.48 36 Particular consequences of the rules in Phillips v. Eyre and McElroy v. McAllister '2.49 - 2.105 38 A. Introduction 2.49 - 2.52 38 B. The Issues 2.53 - 2.105 39 1. Vicarious liability 2.53 - 39 2. Defences 2.54 - 2.55 40 3. Damages 2.56 40 4. Limitations on recovery 2.57 - 2.58 42 5. Prescription and limitation of actions 2.59 - 2.60 43 6. Transmission of claims on death: the survival of actions 2.61 - 2.66 45 (a) The law of England and Wales and of Northern Ireland 2.62 - 2.63 45 (b) The law of Scotland 2.64 - 2.66 47 7. Wrongful death as a cause of action 2.67 - 2.76 48 (a) Introduction 2.67 - 2.68 48 (b) The law of England and Wales and of Northern Ireland 2.69 - 2.73 48 (c) The law of Scotland 2.74 - 2.76 51 8. Husband and wife 2.77 - 2.79 52 9. Foreign land 2.80 - 2.81 54 Paragraphs 10. Contribution 2.82 - 2.84 54 1I. Indemnity 2.85 56 12. Tort or delict and contract 2.86 - 2.101 56 (a) Wrong is both a tort or delict and a breach of contract 2.87 - 2.88 56 (b) Contractual defence to a claim in tort or delict 2.89 - 2.101 57 13. Third party rights against insurers 2.102 - 2.105 63 Torts and delicts at sea 2.106 - 2.112 66 A. Torts and delicts committed on the continental shelf 2.106 66 B. Other torts and delicts committed on the high seas 2.107 - 2.110 67 1. Torts and delicts not confined to one ship 2.107 - 2.109 67 2. Torts and delicts confined to one ship 2.110 70 C. Torts and delicts committed in foreign waters 2.111 - 2.112 70 1. Torts and delicts not confined to one ship 2.111 70 2. Torts and delicts confined to one ship 2.112 71 Torts and delicts in flight 2.113 - 2.114 71 PART 111 - THE CASE FOR REFORM 73 A. The present law is anomalous 3.1 - 3.7 73 B. The present law leads to injustice 3.8 - 3.10 77 C. The present law is uncertain 3.11 - 3.13 79 D. Forum shopping 3.14 - 3.16 80 E. Conclusion: can no better rule be found? 3.17 - 3.18 82 (V) Paragraphs & PART 1V - THE OPTIONS FOR REFORM 83 A. Introduction 4.1 - 4.2 83 B. General considerations 4.3 - 4.23 84 1. Matters which would be unaffected by our proposals 4.3 - 4.8 84 (a) Procedure 4.4 84 (b) Mandatory rules 4.5 84 (c) Public policy 4.6 85 (d) Special choice of law rules 4.7 85 (e) Jurisdiction 4.8 86 2. The expectations of the parties 4.9 - 4.13 86 3. The need for certainty in the . law, and the tension between certainty and refinement 4.14 - 4.18 89 (a) The need for certainty 4.14 - 4.15 89 (b) The tension between certainty and refinement 4;16- 4.18 90 4. The relevance of the problem of ascertaining foreign law 4.19 - 4.20 92 5. Agreement as to the applicable law 4.21 93 6. Uniformity of result 4.22 93 7. Renvoi 4.23 94 C. The options for reform 4.24 - 4.142 94 1. Options based on the lex fori 4.24 - 4.34 94 (a) The lex fori as the uniquely applicable law 4.24 - 4.29 94 (b) The lex fori as basic rule subject to displacement 4.30 - 4.34 97 2. Three rule-selecting approaches 4.35 - 4.54 99 (a) Governmental interest ana 1 y si s 4.36 - 4.45 100 (vi) Paragraphs (i) In principle 4.38 - 4.40 101 (ii) In practice 4.41 - 4.45 103 (b) Principles of preference 4.46 - 4.50 107 (c) Choice-influencing considerations 4.51 - 4.54 110 3. Options based on the lex loci delicti 4.55 - 4.125 112 (a) Reasons for applying the ---lex loci delicti 4.55 - 4.60 112 (b) The definition of the locus delicti in multi-state cases 4.61 - 4.91 116 (i) Introduction 4.61 - 4.66 116 (ii) The present law 4.67 - 4.68 119 (iii) The "place of acting" rule or the "place of result" rule 4.69 - 4.77 120 (iv) Definition of the locus delicti in multi-state cases of personal injury, death, and damage to property 4.78 - 4.82 125 (v) Definition of the locus delicti in other multi-state cases 4.83 - 4.89 128 (vi) Conclusions on the definition of the locus delicti in multi-state cases 4.90 - 4.91 132 (c) The lex loci delicti may not always be appropriate 4.92 - 4.125 133 (i) Possible specific exceptions to the application of the ---lex loci delicti 4.97 - 4.114 138 (a) Common personal law exception 4.98 - 4.102 139 (b) Pre-existing relationship exception 4.103 - 4.109 141 (c) Common enterprise exception 4.110 - 4.114 144 (vi9 Paragraphs (ii) Our provisional conclusions on specific exceptions 4.115 - 4.117 146 (iii) A general exception 4.118 - 4.123 148 (iv) A possible cumulative scheme 4.124 151 (v) The relationship between the general exception and the definition of the locus delicti in multi-state cases not involving personal injury, death, or damage to property 4.125 152 4. The "proper law of the tort" and the Restatement Second 4.126 - 4.142 153 D. Summary 4.143 - 4.146 163 PART V - OUR PREFERRED OPTIONS AS APPLIED TO PARTICULAR TYPES OF TORT AND DELICT I67 A. Introduction 5.1 - 5.3 167 B. Two special aspects of personal injury, death, and damage to property 5.4 - 5.25 168 1. Traffic accidents 5.4 - 5.5 168 2. Products liability 5.6 - 5.25 169 (a) Introduction 5.6 - 5.7 169 (b) The multi-state case 5.8 - 5-24 169 (i) Does a country other than the country of injury have a greater prima facie claim to application in a multi-state case? 5.15 - 5.22 174 (a) Claimant's habitual residence 5.15 174 (b) Country of manufacture 5.16 175 (c) Producer's place of business 5.17 175 (viii) Paragraphs & (d) Country of acquisition 5.18 - 5.22 176 (ii) Foreseeability 5.23 - 5.24 178 (c) Conclusions 5.25 179 C.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Human Rights, Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity in the Commonwealth
    Human Rights, Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity in The Commonwealth Struggles for Decriminalisation and Change Edited by Corinne Lennox and Matthew Waites Human Rights, Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity in The Commonwealth: Struggles for Decriminalisation and Change Edited by Corinne Lennox and Matthew Waites © Human Rights Consortium, Institute of Commonwealth Studies, School of Advanced Study, University of London, 2013 This book is published under a Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NCND 4.0) license. More information regarding CC licenses is available at https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/ Available to download free at http://www.humanities-digital-library.org ISBN 978-1-912250-13-4 (2018 PDF edition) DOI 10.14296/518.9781912250134 Institute of Commonwealth Studies School of Advanced Study University of London Senate House Malet Street London WC1E 7HU Cover image: Activists at Pride in Entebbe, Uganda, August 2012. Photo © D. David Robinson 2013. Photo originally published in The Advocate (8 August 2012) with approval of Sexual Minorities Uganda (SMUG) and Freedom and Roam Uganda (FARUG). Approval renewed here from SMUG and FARUG, and PRIDE founder Kasha Jacqueline Nabagesera. Published with direct informed consent of the main pictured activist. Contents Abbreviations vii Contributors xi 1 Human rights, sexual orientation and gender identity in the Commonwealth: from history and law to developing activism and transnational dialogues 1 Corinne Lennox and Matthew Waites 2
    [Show full text]
  • Aberdeen Student Law Review
    Aberdeen Student Law Review With thanks to our sponsors Stronachs LLP July 2011 Volume 2 www.abdn.ac.uk/law/aslr THE EDITORIAL BOARD 2010 - 2011 Managing Editor Leanne Bain Editors Alice Cannon Ross Douglas Emma Fraser Stuart Lee Bruce Mangeon Fairweather Charlotte Taylor Ryan T. Whelan Jennifer White FOREWORD BY THE HON . LORD WOOLMAN SENATOR OF THE COLLEGE OF JUSTICE Has the ASLR already reached its second volume? I am delighted that the brio of those involved in launching the project has been sustained. That is evident from the table of contents for the new volume. The topics range across legal history, oil and gas law and the law of evidence. In my view, volume two confirms that the ASLR is continuing to make a significant contribution to legal learning in Scotland. Stephen Woolman July 2011 INTRODUCTION TO VOLUME TWO In 1987 Professor Erwin N Griswold, former Dean of Harvard Law School, gave an insight into the history of the Harvard Law Review, the oldest student-led law review in the world. He acknowledged: Some people are concerned that a major legal periodical in the United States is edited and managed by students. It is an unusual situation, but it started that way, and it developed mightily from its own strength.1 I firmly believe in the strength of the student law review, and it is this belief that has shaped the endeavours of the editorial team during the past year The second year of a professional publication can be as difficult as the first, and this year has certainly not been without challenge.
    [Show full text]
  • John Grady 2
    John Andrew Dominic Grady 1. EDUCATION/ QUALIFICATIONS LLB (Honours) 2:1. 1991 – 1995. The University of Edinburgh. I studied Intellectual Property Law, Commercial Law, Delict, Administrative Law, and Company Law at honours. I also studied Intellectual Property Law, Constitutional Law, International Relations and Economics at the University of Poitiers, from January to June 1994. Classes and examinations were held in French. Diploma of Legal Practice. 1995 – 1996. The University of Edinburgh. Post Graduate Diploma in Competition Law. 1998 – 1999. Kings College London, The University of London. 2. RELEVANT EXPERIENCE Trainee Solicitor. Wright Johnston and Mackenzie . September 1996 to August 1998. As a trainee I had seats in the Private Client, Commercial Property, Corporate and Litigation Departments of the Firm. Assistant then associate. Shepherd + Wedderburn. August 1998 – June 2004. Experience includes advising on matters including. European and UK Competition Law • Making and dealing with complaints and investigations under EC and UK Competition Law. • Competition Law aspects of mergers, acquisitions and joint ventures. • Competition Act compliance programmes. • Clearance of significant contractual arrangements under EC and UK regulatory rules through the EC Commission, the Department of Trade and Industry and other regulatory and government bodies. Public and regulatory law • Judicial review of government and regulatory decisions including in respect of determinations of utility regulators, such as the Gas and Electricity Markets Authority. • Advising on enforcement actions by regulators such as the Gas and Electricity Markets Authority. This included regulatory action that could lead to significant multi million pound fines. • The drafting of new legislation and regulations. • Regulatory reforms in the energy sector, including key aspects of the restructuring of a major Scottish plc pursuant to EC and UK legislation.
    [Show full text]
  • Common Law Fraud Liability to Account for It to the Owner
    FRAUD FACTS Issue 17 March 2014 (3rd edition) INFORMATION FOR ORGANISATIONS Fraud in Scotland Fraud does not respect boundaries. Fraudsters use the same tactics and deceptions, and cause the same harm throughout the UK. However, the way in which the crimes are defined, investigated and prosecuted can depend on whether the fraud took place in Scotland or England and Wales. Therefore it is important for Scottish and UK-wide businesses to understand the differences that exist. What is a ‘Scottish fraud’? Embezzlement Overview of enforcement Embezzlement is the felonious appropriation This factsheet focuses on criminal fraud. There are many interested parties involved in of property without the consent of the owner In Scotland criminal fraud is mainly dealt the detection, investigation and prosecution with under the common law and a number where the appropriation is by a person who of statutory offences. The main fraud offences has received a limited ownership of the of fraud in Scotland, including: in Scotland are: property, subject to restoration at a future • Police Service of Scotland time, or possession of property subject to • common law fraud liability to account for it to the owner. • Financial Conduct Authority • uttering There is an element of breach of trust in • Trading Standards • embezzlement embezzlement making it more serious than • Department for Work and Pensions • statutory frauds. simple theft. In most cases embezzlement involves the appropriation of money. • Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. It is important to note that the Fraud Act 2006 does not apply in Scotland (apart from Statutory frauds s10(1) which increases the maximum In addition there are a wide range of statutory Investigating fraud custodial sentence for fraudulent trading to offences which are closely related to the 10 years).
    [Show full text]
  • What the Criminal Law Is Built Upon Howard Newcomb Morse
    Marquette Law Review Volume 34 Article 3 Issue 4 Spring 1951 What the Criminal Law is Built Upon Howard Newcomb Morse Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/mulr Part of the Law Commons Repository Citation Howard Newcomb Morse, What the Criminal Law is Built Upon, 34 Marq. L. Rev. 255 (1951). Available at: http://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/mulr/vol34/iss4/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Marquette Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Marquette Law Review by an authorized administrator of Marquette Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. WHAT THE CRIMINAL LAW IS BUILT UPON Howard Newcomb Morse* Let us consider how certain doctrines of the Law of Crimes exist in other branches of the common law, sometimes under different no- menclature. The doctrine of merger applies to both Criminal Law and Family Law-the absorption of the attempt into the completed crime and the fiction of the unity of husband and wife. For example, the United States local common law majority rule holds that the misde- meanor no longer merges by operation of law into the felony or the lesser felony into the greater, but rather that the American public prosecutor enjoys an election in the matter. Only the attempt is con- solidated by operation of law into the completed crime. Also, the American local common law majority rule holds that the common law fiction of the unity of husband and wife remains in only certain aspects
    [Show full text]
  • Rethinking Maltese Legal Hybridity: a Chimeric Illusion Or a Healthy Grafted European Law Mixture? Kevin Aquilina
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Louisiana State University: DigitalCommons @ LSU Law Center Journal of Civil Law Studies Volume 4 Number 2 Mediterranean Legal Hybridity: Mixtures and Movements, the Relationship between the Legal Article 5 and Normative Traditions of the Region; Malta, June 11-12, 2010 12-1-2011 Rethinking Maltese Legal Hybridity: A Chimeric Illusion or a Healthy Grafted European Law Mixture? Kevin Aquilina Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/jcls Part of the Civil Law Commons Repository Citation Kevin Aquilina, Rethinking Maltese Legal Hybridity: A Chimeric Illusion or a Healthy Grafted European Law Mixture?, 4 J. Civ. L. Stud. (2011) Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/jcls/vol4/iss2/5 This Conference Proceeding is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews and Journals at LSU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Civil Law Studies by an authorized editor of LSU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. RETHINKING MALTESE LEGAL HYBRIDITY: A CHIMERIC ILLUSION OR A HEALTHY GRAFTED EUROPEAN LAW MIXTURE? Kevin Aquilina* Abstract ....................................................................................... 261 I. Introduction ............................................................................. 262 II. The Nature of the Maltese Mixed Legal System.................... 263 III. The Nine Periods of Maltese Legal History ......................... 265 A. Roman Malta (218 B.C.-870) .............................................266 B. Arab Malta (870-1090)........................................................267 C. Norman Malta (1090-1530) ................................................268 D. Hospitallers Malta (1530-1798) ..........................................269 E. French Malta (1798-1800) ...................................................270 F. British Malta (1800-1964) ...................................................271 G.
    [Show full text]
  • Spine for Bulletin of Medieval Canon Law
    Spine for Bulletin of Medieval Canon Law Top to Bottom Vol. 32 Bulletin of Medieval Canon Law 2015 THE STEPHAN KUTTNER INSTITUTE OF MEDIEVAL CANON LAW MÜNCHEN 2015 BULLETIN OF MEDIEVAL CANON LAW NEW SERIES VOLUME 32 AN ANNUAL REVIEW PUBLISHED BY THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA PRESS FOR THE STEPHAN KUTTNER INSTITUTE OF MEDIEVAL CANON LAW BULLETIN OF MEDIEVAL CANON LAW THE STEPHAN KUTTNER INSTITUTE OF MEDIEVAL CANON LAW MÜNCHEN 2015 BULLETIN OF MEDIEVAL CANON LAW NEW SERIES VOLUME 32 AN ANNUAL REVIEW PUBLISHED BY THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA PRESS FOR THE STEPHAN KUTTNER INSTITUTE OF MEDIEVAL CANON LAW Published annually at the Stephan Kuttner Institute of Medieval Canon Law Editorial correspondence should be addressed to: STEPHAN-KUTTNER INSTITUTE OF MEDIEVAL CANON LAW Professor-Huber-Platz 2 D-80539 München PETER LANDAU, Editor Universität München [email protected] or KENNETH PENNINGTON, Editor The School of Canon Law The Catholic University of America Washington, D.C. 20064 [email protected] Advisory Board PÉTER CARDINAL ERDP PETER LINEHAN Archbishop of Esztergom St. John’s College Budapest Cambridge University JOSÉ MIGUEL VIÉJO-XIMÉNEZ ORAZIO CONDORELLI Universidad de Las Palmas de Università degli Studi Gran Canaria Catania FRANCK ROUMY KNUT WOLFGANG NÖRR Université Panthéon-Assas Universität Tübingen Paris II Inquiries concerning subscriptions or notifications of change of address should be sent to the Bulletin of Medieval Canon Law Subscriptions, PO Box 19966, Baltimore, MD 21211-0966. Notifications can also be sent by email to [email protected] Telephone (410) 516-6987 or 1-800-548-1784 or fax 410-516-3866.
    [Show full text]
  • The Application of the Doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur to Medical Negligence
    University of Pretoria etd THE APPLICATION OF THE DOCTRINE OF RES IPSA LOQUITUR TO MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE CASES: A COMPARATIVE SURVEY by PATRICK VAN DEN HEEVER B IURIS LLB (UOFS) LLM (UCT) submitted in accordance with the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR LEGUM at the UNIVERSITY OF PRETORIA PROMOTER: PROF DR P A CARSTENS JANUARY 2002 University of Pretoria etd II TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE XV SUMMARY (ENGLISH) XVII SUMMARY (AFRIKAANS) XX CHAPTER 1 1.1 GENERAL INTRODUCTION 1 1.2 PURPOSE 7 1.3 CHOICE OF LEGAL SYSTEM 7 1.4 METHODS 9 CHAPTER 2 THE APPLICATION OF THE DOCTRINE OF RES IPSA LOQUITUR TO MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE CASES IN SOUTH AFRICA 2.1 INTRODUCTION 13 2.2 THE ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOCTRINE IN SOUTH AFRICA 15 2.3 REQUIREMENTS FOR THE INVOCATION OF THE DOCTRINE IN SOUTH AFRICAN LAW 18 2.3.1 Introduction 18 University of Pretoria etd III 2.3.2 Negligence 19 2.3.3 Control of the instrumentality 22 2.4 THE EFFECT OF THE APPLICATION OF THE DOCTRINE ON THE ONUS OF PROOF 23 2.4.1 Introduction 23 2.4.2 Res ipsa loquitur and circumstantial evidence 23 2.4.3 Onus of proof 28 2.4.4 The nature of the defendant’s explanation in rebuttal 30 2.5 MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE CASES 37 2.5.1 Introduction 37 2.5.2 Case law 40 2.5.3 LEGAL OPINION 59 2.5.3.1 Introduction 59 2.5.3.2 The majority judgment in Van Wyk v Lewis 60 2.5.3.3 Critical analysis of the majority judgment 65 2.5.3.4 Introduction 65 2.5.3.5 The evidence of Dr Lewis 65 2.5.3.6 Conclusion 68 2.6 SYNOPSIS 74 University of Pretoria etd IV 2.6.1 INTRODUCTION 74 2.6.1.1 The requirements for the
    [Show full text]
  • Edwin Busuttil*
    - Malta Edwin Busuttil* Malta is a unitary state with a monarchical form The territories of Malta comprise the Island of of government. It came into existence as an Malta, the Island of Gozo, and the other islands of independent state on 21 Sept. 1964, in virtue of the Maltese Archipelago, including the territorial the Malta Independence Act passed by the United waters thereo£ Kingdom Parliament in the same year (1964, c. 86). I. CONSTITUTIONAL SYSTEM Privy Council" on 2 Sept. 1964 (S.I. 1964 no. I. Nationality 1398). Maltese nationality is unitary, but a citizen of The power of government in Malta is vested in Malta, by virtue of his Maltese citizenship, also the Head of State and Parliament. In this Malta has the common status of a Commonwealth follows the United Kingdom pattern of parlia­ citizen in common with the citizens of other mentary democracy. countries in the British Commonwealth. In Malta the Constitution is supreme and the Maltese citizenship is acquired by birth or de­ Constitutional Court is empowered to decide on scent, or by registration or naturalization under the constitutionality of legislation. certain conditions. It may be lost by voluntary The machinery for amending the Constitution renunciation, by automatic cessation in the event is somewhat involved, for many provisions of the of dual nationality, or by deprivation by the state Constitution are entrenched. Entrenchment takes in certain circumstances where citizenship was two forms. One group of entrenched sections can originally acquired by registration or naturaliza­ only be amended if an amending Bill is passed by tion (Canst.
    [Show full text]
  • In Scots Law
    1 When the Exception is the Rule: Rationalising the ‘Medical Exception’ in Scots Law 2 I. INTRODUCTION No medical practitioner who performs a legitimate medical operation on a patient (in the course of competently carrying out the duties of their profession)1 commits a delict or a criminal offence.2 This is so in spite of the fact that to infringe the bodily integrity of another person is plainly both a crime3 and a civil wrong.4 Notwithstanding the fact that the patient may desire the operation, the ‘defence’ of consent cannot possibly justify the serious injuries intentionally inflicted in the course of an operation to effect a kidney transplant, or to amputate a limb, or even to insert a stent, since these procedures are highly invasive and effect irreversible changes to the physicality of the patient(s).5 The ‘medical exception’ has consequently and consistently been invoked by legal commentators when considering cases of invasive surgery, or procedures which involve serious wounding.6 Since consent is no defence to serious assault,7 this exception to the general rule that to inflict such is to commit a crime must be justified by means other than an appeal to the 1 ‘Proper’ medical treatment is a prerequisite: Margaret Brazier and Sara Fovargue, Transforming Wrong into Right: What is ‘Proper Medical Treatment’?, in Sara Fovargue and Alexandra Mullock, The Legitimacy of Medical Treatment: What Role for the Medical Exception, (London: Routledge, 2016), p.12 2 See, generally, Sara Fovargue and Alexandra Mullock, The Legitimacy of Medical Treatment: What Role for the Medical Exception, (London: Routledge, 2016), passim.
    [Show full text]
  • Forms of Liability in the Law of Delict: Fault-Based Liability and Liability Without Fault
    Janno Lahe Doctor iuris, Lecturer of Civil Law, University of Tartu Forms of Liability in the Law of Delict: Fault-Based Liability and Liability without Fault Through times, the question of strictness of liability has been one of the principal problems in the law of delict. Thus there has been a search for the limit to the extent of which damage must be borne by the aggrieved party and for the point from where on the aggrieved party must be compensated for the damage by a third person, i.e. generally the tortfeasor.*1 Or, more specifically, whether a fact of causing damage is sufficient to give rise to delictual liability or the tortfeasors fault is also required for that purpose has remained a timeless question. This article is aimed at analysing what the prevailing form of liability is in delictual law and what it should be. In addition, the article will seek an answer to the question of what the trends of development are as regards the strictness of delictual liability. Understandably, this sphere of problems is specific not only to Estonia: the problems in question are topical in all legal orders. This article is divided into four subtitles: the first provides a brief review on the historical development of liability in the law of delict and the second addresses the forms of delictual liability in present-day legal orders. The third subtitle offers an analysis regarding the rationale of different forms of liability in the law of delict. The final, fourth subtitle is dedicated to exploring whether and to what extent possible developments of liability in the law of delict can be pointed out on the basis of the present tendencies.
    [Show full text]
  • A Codified Law of Tort-The French Experience*
    Louisiana Law Review Volume 39 Number 4 Summer 1979 Article 2 8-1-1979 A Codified Law of orT t - The French Experience André Tunc Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/lalrev Part of the Law Commons Repository Citation André Tunc, A Codified Law of orT t - The French Experience, 39 La. L. Rev. (1979) Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/lalrev/vol39/iss4/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews and Journals at LSU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Louisiana Law Review by an authorized editor of LSU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A CODIFIED LAW OF TORT-THE FRENCH EXPERIENCE* Andr6 Tunc** The purpose of this lecture is not to demonstrate any supe- riority of a codified law system over a system of judge-made law. The speaker does not wish to hide the fact that he strongly believes in the values of codification,' but to establish such values is not his present purpose. And, if he were to prepare a case for codiication, he would certainly not choose to build it on civil liability, a field of law where decision may depend on subtle variations of facts and which is presently so unstable that one may consider that it is in a state of crisis.' Nor is the aim of this lecture merely to present a summary of the French law of civil liability, as valuable pictures of this matter have already been drawn.' Between a demonstration and a mere photography, however, there may still be room for a critical examination.
    [Show full text]