DOCSLIB.ORG

Restitution and Unjust Enrichment Reasons for Restitution 211 D

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Restitution and Unjust Enrichment Reasons for Restitution 211 D vi Preface Quartahl Reuicu: and Current Legal Problems, Butterworths, Pty Ltd, publishers of the [ournal of Contract Law, the University of Toronto Press, publishers of the Unh'ersity of To rOil to Law [ourna! and the Editorial Committees of the Cambridge Law lou mill, the Canadian [ournal Contents of Law and [urisprudence (formerly the University of Western Ontario Law Revieio), and of Current Legal Problems for permission to use works originally published in those journals. /sbbreuiatious Over the years participants in the Oxford BCL Restitution class IX Table of Cases have provided enthusiasm and perceptive questioning (often from a X Commonwealth perspective) which has helped me to clarify and Table of Statutes xxviii develop my thoughts. Faculty and students at the National University 1. What Can Restitution Do For You? of Singapore, Osgoode Hall Law School, the University of Western 1 Australia and the University of Virginia, institutions at which I have 2. Benefit, Reliance, and the Structure of Unjust Enrichment 21 been fortunate enough to teach, also contributed to my understanding of a subject which can sometimes appear elusive. Merton College and 3. Discharge for Breach: Instalments, Deposits, and Other the Faculty of Law at Oxford have provided supportive and stimulating Payments Due Before Completion 45 environments in which to work and my Merton colleague, John Barton, has patiently dealt with many questions. I am also indebted to many 4. Gap-filling and Risk-reversal 78 others who commented on drafts of the articles on which these essays 5. Duress, Restitution, and Contract Renegotiation are based, but primarily to Peter Birks who, first as a teacher and later as -I- 95 a colleague, stimulated my interest in this subject and who also found ....f.. 6. Mistaken Payments in the Law of Restitution 137 time to read and comment on the new material in Essays 5 and 9 and the postscripts to Essays 6 and 7. 7. Unrequested Payment of Another's Debt 177 Finally, this book is dedicated to Charlotte, Sam and Hannah whose patient tolerance of my preoccupation with its subject was far greater 8. The Nature of Waiver of Tort 206 than I was entitled to expect. Merton Coilege J.B. 9. Unfinished Business: Integrating Equity 244 Oxford Index 259 12 November 1990 The k~.II,lifli number of m courts are the T'hcre I" \ igol juJgl;" and ac can do to ,)'''I~ Contents in the U K .10' the first on th lii!ht on the .... EDITOR'S PREFACE ix and equity • .II THE CONTRIBUTORS xiii recent landm TABtE OF CASES xiv Peter Birks TABLE 011 LEGISLATION xxxi in (he Lnivei TABLE OF INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENTS xxxv oulsCollcg 10 Ilu LJTT 0 I. Equity's Identification Rules 1 edited man) David Hayton ran gin!! fron He was mad 2. The Legal and Moral Limits of Common Law Tracing 23 1995 and is:! Paul Matthews 3. Tracing, Mixing and Laundering 73 Stephen Moriarty 4. Tracing the Proceeds of Crime: an Inequitable Solution? 95 Helen Norman 5. The Involuntary Launderer: The Banker's Liability for Deposits of the Proceeds of Crime 115 Simon Gleeson 6. Change of Position 135 Richard Nolan 7· After Change of Position: Good Faith Exchange in the Modem Law of Restitution 191 Kit Barker 8. Total Failure of Consideration and Counter-Restitution: Two Issues or One? 217 Ewan McKendrick 9· The Nature of Ministerial Receipt 243 William Swadling 10. Passing On 261 Francis Rose II. Overview: Tracing, Claiming and Defences 289 Peter Birks INDEX 349 Contents LIST 01, CONTRIUU'I OI~S xv fABLE OF CASES xvii TABLEOFSTATUTES xxxiii l. The Law of Restitution: The Past and the Future Gareth Jones 1 2. Mistake and the Role of the 'Submission to an Honest Claim' SHe Arrowsmith 17 3. Public Authorities, Ultra Vires, and Restitution Andrew Burrows 39 4. Payment of Debts Charged upon Property Richard Sutton 71 5. In Defence of Free Acceptance Peter Birks 105 6. Frustration, Restitution, and Loss Apportionment Ewan McKendrick 147 7. Restitution and Illegal Transactions Brice Dickson 171 8. Restitution as Part of Contract Law S. M. Waddams 197 9. Property and Unjust Enrichment Roy Goode 215 10. Valid, Voidable, Qualified, and Non-Existing Obligations: ....." An Alternative Perspective on the Law of Restitution Daniel Friedmann 247 11. Should There Be Legislative Development of the Law of Restitution? Jack Beatson 279 303 INDEX This worl ofe Fellc schc Contents the I whi. Table of Cam A xxv TabL~ of Legislation oft! xlvii Roman Law foe, u List of Contributors mal lvii d~ and Introduction sdu Andrew Burrous and Alan Rodger ani uni I THE ENGLISH LAW OF UNJUST ENRICHMENT his allt AND RESTITUTION the 1. The Evolution of the Species 13 gen Francis Rose 1 eo'll General Concepts res' Absence of Basis: The New Scheme ern 2. Birksian 33 Andrew Burrows leg pU' 3. Three Enrichment Issues 49 Robert Stevens Am 4. Some Thoughts on Change of Position 65 Co Gareth Jones 5. The Role of Fault in the Law of Restirution 83 Lo Graham Virgo in 6. Subrogation: Persistent Misunderst:andings 105 Charles Mitchell 7. Tracing 119 Lionel Smith 8. Gain-Based Damages and Compensation 141 James Edelman Some Particular Unjust Factors 9. Unlawful Statutes and Mistake of Law: Is There a Smile on the Face of Schrodinger's Cat? 163 Jack Beatson 10. The Further Travails of Duress 181 Ewan McKendrick Contents Contents xxiii This lOUI 23. work 11. Undue Influence: Beyond Impaired Consent and Wrongdoing The Rornanizarion of Spain: The Contribution of City Laws in ofCi the Light of the Lex Irnitana towards a Rdational Analysis 201 439 FeUo [osepl: Georg Wolf Mindy C/;m- Wishart schol Absent Parties and Bloody-Minded Judges 12. Unjust Enrichment, Discharge for Breach, and the Primacy 24. 455 the II Ernest Metzger whic of Contract 223 As Gerard McMetL 25. 'You Never Can Tell with Bees': Good Advice from Pooh for oftn Students of the Lex Aquilia 475 focu Property, Insolvency, and Restitution Arianna Pretto-Sakmann map 13. Resulting Trusts 247 26. Late Arrivals: The Appendix in Justinian's Digest Reconsidered 497 dre\\ Rabm Chambers T01'lY Honore and. 14. [one: V Jones: Property or Unjust Enrichment? 265 27. Logic and Experience in Roman Law 513 scho Peter Mi/lat David Johnston an it univ 15. Unjust Delivery 277 28. Unjust Enrichment: The Tenant's Tale 525 rusv William Swadlillg Eltjo Schrage aUt} 16. The Avoidance ofTransacrions in Insolvency Proceedings and thel Rescitutionary Defences 299 IV LEGAL HISTORY gene Roy Goode n 29. Bezoar-Stones, Gall-Stones, and Gem-Stones: A Chapter in cove the History of the Tort of Deceit 545 resti II THE COMPARATIVE LAW OF UNJUST John Baker enri ENRICHMENT AND RESTITUTION 30. Denials Ancient and Modern, with some Roman Footnotes 561 lega 17. Resrimrion mer Termination for Breach of Contract German Jeffrey Hackney pup Law after me Reform of 2002 323 31. Rumford Market and the Genesis of Fiduciary Obligations 577 &inhard Zimmm1UJnll And Joshua Gazier Cor 18. No Basis: A Comparative View 343 32. Slavery and the Roman Law of Evidence in Eighteenth-Century and Sonja Meier Scotland 599 19. Unjust Enrichment as Absence of Basis: Can English Law Cope? 363 John W Cairns Lor Gerhard Dannmumn 33. Sir William Jones and the Nature of Law 619 inC 20. The Fallacy of'Restirucion for Wrongs' David Ibbetson Thomas Krebs 379 21. Peter Birks and Scots Enrichment Law Hector MacQ;uen 401 The Publications of Peter Birks 1969-2005 641 Compiled by Eric Descheemaeker [II ROMAN LAW Index 653 22. What did Damnum Iniuria Actually Mean' Alan Rodger . 421 PHILOSOPHICAL FOUNDATIONS OF The-Law of Unjust Enrichment • EDITED BY Robert Chambers Charles Mitchell ~ James Penner OXFORD 1 d o OXFORD V NIV81l.SlTY PIl.8SS CI G~.lt CI,,,.nd<lll!lt reer, Oxford OX2 6DI' Contents t1 Oxford Univ<rsll)' Press i, ~dCI,mmetll 01 rhe Utllversit)'ofOxfor.i,. It tUnl\('$(h.lJnh~rsit,..,ohJ"'tivtOr(,cdkll"" III research. scholarship, fi and <due.llion bv publhhinl\ worldwide ill tl 0, 1~lf\1New York List of Contributors VII AucklJnd DpeTown OJre.S.I.,m, HO~lg K~II!1. K,t.",.d~i IX u Kual~ Lumpur ~hdrid Melbau",. Me~.co C.ty Nairobi Table of Cases P New Delhi ,It,tlll\h,ri 1Jil'(i Toronto Ta!Jle of Legislation XIX f \\'itlt olliers in .o\tgen(itIJ Allstria Bruzll Chile Czech Republic France Greece P GuatemalJ Hutll\axy lraly J.pJn Pol••nd Ponug.1 Singapore S<lU(IlKo~J SWi(1trlJnd Thailand Turkey Ukrulne VIetnam PART I INTRODUCTION n OxfOrd is a ~gl5t.red rrude mark 01'0. ford Universit y Press o in thO UK an d in certain orher couru ries 1. J ntroducrion 3 Published in (he United Stutes Robert Chambers, Charles Mitchell, a1tdjames Penner by Oxford University Press lnc., New York e e The~'<rJJ Contributors. 2009 The moral rights 01the authors have bee II asserted PART II NORMATIVE FOUNDATIONS Crewn copyright nw<ri.J1 is reproduced under Cia ss Licence NumbaCOI POOOOH8 wuh rhe permission ofOPSI 2. Correctively Unjust Enrichment 31 and the Queen's Printer for Scotland Ernest j Weinrib Da(;J~ rigbt Oaford UniversilY Press (maker) Firs(pubh.hcl1009 3. Restitution's Realism 54 All righrsreserv<d. No PJr[ of rhis publicauon may be reproduced, Hanoch Dagan .. ored iflarelriC!Y.llsYSlem.or rransmirted, in any form or by any rneans, 81 wirhou[rM prior permission in writingofOxford Universiry Press, 4. The Normative Foundations of Unjust Enrichment orasC!Xp~Y permined by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate Dennis KLimehuk ~fogll1phia righ,sorganiZJtion. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the abo".
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The London School of Economics and Political Science Proprietary Rights
    The London School of Economics and Political Science Proprietary rights in indirectly held securities: legal risks and future challenges Elena Christine Zaccaria A thesis submitted to the Department of Law of the London School of Economics and Political Science for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, London, April 2015. Declaration I certify that the thesis I have presented for examination for the MPhil/PhD degree of the London School of Economics and Political Science is solely my own work other than where I have clearly indicated that it is the work of others (in which case the extent of any work carried out jointly by me and any other person is clearly identified in it). The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. Quotation from it is permitted, provided that full acknowledgement is made. This thesis may not be reproduced without my prior written consent. I warrant that this authorisation does not, to the best of my belief, infringe the rights of any third party. I declare that my thesis consists of 69,572 words. Statement of use of third party for editorial help I confirm that my thesis was copy edited for conventions of language, spelling and punctuation by Babette Pragnell and Rachel Murray. 2 Abstract Over the centuries, English law has developed a ‘flexible’ and ‘malleable’ idea of property - in particular through the rules of equity - which has proved capable of adapting to the continuing changes in market practice. The question now to be addressed is whether this ‘flexible’ idea of property can also adequately represent interests in indirectly held securities or whether (as suggested by the Financial Market Law Committee) the new financial practice requires statutory clarification.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the FAILURE of UNIVERSAL THEORIES of TORT LAW James
    THE FAILURE OF UNIVERSAL THEORIES OF TORT LAW James Goudkamp* and John Murphy** Many scholars have offered theories that purport to explain the whole of the law of torts. At least some of these theories do not seem to be specific to a single jurisdiction. Several appear to endeavour to account for tort law in at least the major common law jurisdictions, or even throughout the common law world. These include Ernest Weinrib’s corrective justice theory, Robert Stevens’s rights theory, and Richard Posner’s economic theory. This article begins by explaining why it is appropriate to understand these three theories as universal theories of tort law, which is an important feature of these theories that has not hitherto been properly appreciated. This explanation draws upon various overt claims (or other strong intimations) made by the theorists themselves to the effect that this is how their respective accounts should be understood. The article then proceeds to test these theories, all of which are leading accounts of tort law, against the evidence in Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States. Not all of these theories have received a proper airing in these major common law jurisdictions, which is a gap in the literature that this article seeks to fill. The parts of tort law on which we focus are (1) the breach element of the action in negligence, (2) the law that determines when a duty of care will be owed in respect of pure economic * Fellow, Keble College, Oxford; Associate Professor, Oxford Law Faculty; Academic Fellow, Inner Temple; Senior Honorary Research Fellow, Faculty of Law, University of Western Australia, Honorary Principal Fellow, School of Law, University of Wollongong, barrister, 7 King’s Bench Walk.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Rights and Private Law
    1 Rights and Private Law DONAL NOLAN AND ANDREW ROBERTSON* I. INTRODUCTION N RECENT YEARS a strand of thinking has developed in pri- vate law scholarship which has come to be known as ‘rights’ or I ‘rights-based’ analysis. This kind of analysis seeks to develop an understanding of private law obligations which is driven, primarily or exclusively, by the recognition of the rights we have against each other, rather than by other infl uences on private law, such as the pursuit of community welfare goals. Rights-based theories of contract,1 torts2 and unjust enrichment3 have been developed. A number of doctrines within the law of tort have been subjected to rights analysis.4 Thinking on the law of property has been informed by innovative analysis of the nature of property rights.5 The relationship between primary rights and the second- * We are grateful to Allan Beever, Peter Cane, Helge Dedek, Gregory Keating, Jason Neyers and Robert Stevens for their helpful comments on an earlier draft. The usual caveat applies. 1 See, eg, P Benson, ‘The Unity of Contract Law’ in P Benson (ed), The Theory of Con- tract Law (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2001) 118. On rights-based theories of contract more generally, see SA Smith, Contract Theory (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2004) 140–58. 2 R Stevens, Torts and Rights (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2007). 3 See, eg, EJ Weinrib, ‘The Normative Structure of Unjust Enrichment’ in C Rickett and R Grantham (eds), Structure and Justifi cation in Private Law: Essays for Peter Birks (Oxford, Hart Publishing, 2008) 21.
    [Show full text]
  • Blueprint October 2010
    blueprint Staff magazine for the University of Oxford | October 2010 Vital vaccines | Future leaders | Boosting the Bank of England 2 Blueprint October 2010 Firm News in brief foundations The Bodleian Libraries’ Book Storage Facility was officially opened by the Vice-Chancellor and Bodley’s Librarian on 7 October. The book warehouse, which can hold up to 8.5 million volumes, will store books, maps, manuscripts, microfilms, periodicals and newspapers from the Libraries’ collections. They will be stored in 745,000 conservation trays in an 11m-high shelving system. The £26m purpose-built facility, in South Marston near Swindon, has been Scott Browning completed in less than a year since the ground-breaking. The programme of cross-depart- ‘Shared Treasures’ was the theme of this year’s Alumni Weekend, mental and cross-collegiate building which took place on 24–26 September. The weekend celebrated construction and renovation that the reopening of the Ashmolean and Pitt Rivers Museums, as well the University is setting in motion as paying tribute to the University’s museums, libraries and archives, is documented in a new publication, winners of a Queen’s Anniversary Prize. Now in its fourth year, the Foundations for the Future (www. 2010 Alumni Weekend was attended by over 1,000 alumni and ox.ac.uk/about_the_university/ friends and consisted of a programme of more than 120 lectures, foundations_for_the_future). Rob Judges panel discussions, walking tours, concerts and social activities. The publication describes some of the major building projects and The Oxford Thinking campaign has continued to make significant refurbishments that are currently progress, not least thanks to a gift of £75m from Leonard Blavatnik, being undertaken, such as the which ranks as one of the largest philanthropic gifts ever made to Radcliffe Observatory Quarter a cause in the UK (see p11).
    [Show full text]
  • When and Why Does Unjustified Enrichment Justify the Recognition of Proprietary Rights?
    WHEN AND WHY DOES UNJUSTIFIED ENRICHMENT JUSTIFY THE RECOGNITION OF PROPRIETARY RIGHTS? ROBERT STEVENS∗ INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 919 I. RIGHTS AND THINGS............................................................................ 920 II. RIGHTS AND TRUSTS ........................................................................... 921 III. TRUSTS AND TRANSFERS ..................................................................... 923 IV. RIGHTS AND VALUE ............................................................................ 925 V. RIGHTS AND TRACING ......................................................................... 929 VI. RIGHTS AND SUBROGATION ................................................................ 930 VII. RIGHTS AND LIENS .............................................................................. 931 VIII. RIGHTS AND REMEDIES ....................................................................... 932 IX. RIGHTS AND PRIORITIES ...................................................................... 935 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................... 936 INTRODUCTION A Restatement’s central purpose is not to explain why the law is as it is, but rather to restate the law in as clear and coherent a manner as possible. In this paper my purpose is not to duplicate the (superb) work of the Restatement (Third) of Restitution and Unjust Enrichment,1 but rather to try to explain
    [Show full text]
  • Restitution: a New Start ?
    5 Restitution: A New Start ? LIONEL SMITH * I. Th e Problem In my view, something has gone wrong in the law of restitution for unjust enrichment. In this chapter, I aim to explain what I think has gone wrong, and to propose the beginning of a solution. Th e fi rst part aims to describe the problem and why it is a serious one. Th e second part off ers the beginning of a way forward. Private law in the common law is oriented around causes of action. Causes of action are normative packages that justify liability. Th e phrase ‘ cause of action ’ is actually quite ambiguous and in my view has three distinct meanings or senses.1 Th e fi rst meaning is the most abstract and general. An example of it is in the sentence, ‘ the cause of action in battery consists of the intentional infl iction upon the body of another of a harmful or off ensive contact ’ . 2 Th is is a statement that if any conduct occurs that fi ts this general description, a claim will arise (subject to defences). Th e second meaning focuses on facts. It is oft en found in judicial defi ni- tions, like this one: A cause of action has traditionally been defi ned as comprising every fact which it would be necessary for the plaintiff to prove, if disputed, in order to support his or her right to the judgment of the court. 3 On this defi nition, a cause of action is not a general statement but a collection of particular facts that have happened.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nature of the Beneficiary's Right Under a Trust: Proprietary Right, Purely Personal Right Or Right Against a Right? A
    This is a pre-copyedited, author-produced version of an article accepted for publication in Law Quarterly Review following peer review. The definitive published version Zaccaria, E.C. (2019) 'The nature of the beneficiary’s right under a trust: proprietary right, purely personal right or right against a right?', Law Quarterly Review, 135 (July), 460-483 is available online on Westlaw UK, https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/ I79B94910865C11E997B3891CC225DE3D/View/FullText.html. For educational use only. The nature of the beneficiary’s right under a trust: proprietary right, purely personal right or right against a right? Elena Christine Zaccaria∗ Keywords Beneficiaries; Equitable interests; Proprietary rights; Trust A. Introduction Legal theorists typically regard the concept of property as a “bundle of rights” that may be exercised by the rightful owner or possessor in regard to a thing. The interests that are associated with property are the three traditional rights of enjoyment, management and possession as understood in their broadest, most abstract form1. By enjoyment what is meant is the right to enjoy the benefits of property and receive an income from it. The right to management is the right to decide how and by whom the thing owned or possessed shall be used or transferred. Lastly, the right of possession consists of two elements: “first, the exercise of factual control over the [thing]; and secondly, the concomitant intention to exclude others from the exercise of control”.2 The same “bundle of rights” does not necessarily attach to all forms of property, as there may be a need to detach some rights from others and to vest them in different persons.
    [Show full text]
  • The Refugee Jurist and American Law Schools, 1933-1941 Kyle Graham Santa Clara University School of Law, [email protected]
    Santa Clara Law Santa Clara Law Digital Commons Faculty Publications Faculty Scholarship 1-1-2002 The Refugee Jurist and American Law Schools, 1933-1941 Kyle Graham Santa Clara University School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/facpubs Recommended Citation 50 Am. J. Comp. L. 777 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at Santa Clara Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of Santa Clara Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. KYLE GRAHAM The Refugee Jurist and American Law Schools, 1933-1941 The position of younger men, just about to enter upon their careeras academic men is almost more distressing than that of the fully arrived professor. The latter can find a home else- where. The former have the roots cut out from under them.1 - Yale Law School Professor Edwin Borchard, 1933 With patience younger men can fit into the American scheme 2 of things. Older men will find difficulty. - Borchard, 1938 In 1933, Adolf Hitler and his National Socialist party assumed control of the German government. Over the next decade, Nazi- orchestrated persecution would force hundreds of academics, includ- ing several dozen law teachers, from their positions at European uni- versities. 3 Many displaced jurists sought to continue their careers in the United States. They thought a spirit of scientific brotherhood and respect for Continental scholarship would impel U.S. law schools to grant them refuge and succor.
    [Show full text]
  • Programme Summary Tuesday 3 September 2019 Time Event
    Programme Summary Tuesday 3 September 2019 Time Event Location 09.30-12.30 Prior event: BACL Annual Seminar Harrington 337 Comparative Law in Troubled Times 11.30-18.00 Registration and Enquiry Desk Open Harrington Social Space, Ground Floor 12.30-14.00 Lunch and Publishers Exhibition Harrington Social Space, Ground Floor 14.00-15.30 Subject Sections A1 15.30-16.00 Afternoon Refreshments and Publishers Harrington Social Space, Ground Floor Exhibition 16.00-17.30 Subject Sections A2 17.30 – 18.15 Early Careers Session Greenbank Lecture Theatre 18.00 -19.15 Drinks Reception Harrington Social Space, Ground Floor 19.15 -21.30 Lancashire Themed 3 Course Dinner Harrington Restaurant, UCLan Wednesday 5 September 2018 Time Event Location 08.00-18.00 Registration and Enquiry Desk Open Harrington Social Space, Ground Floor 09.00-10.30 Subject Sections A3 10.30-11.00 Morning Refreshments and Publishers Harrington Social Space, Ground Floor Exhibition 11.00-12.30 Subject Sections A4 12.30-14.00 Lunch and Publishers Exhibition Harrington Social Space, Ground Floor 13.00–13.50 New session organised by the Society’s EDI Greenbank Lecture Theatre Committee “A vision for an inclusive SLS” 14.00-15.30 Plenary 1: Central Questions about the Harrington Lecture Theatre Creation, Development and Reform of Law Lady Hale DBE, President of the Supreme Court Elizabeth Gardiner CB, First Parliamentary Counsel Professor David Ormerod QC (Hon), Law Commissioner Chair Professor Andrew Burrows QC (Hon), All Souls College Oxford 15.30-16.00 Afternoon Refreshments and
    [Show full text]
  • Procedural Incrementalism: a Model for International Bankruptcy John A
    University of Michigan Law School University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository Articles Faculty Scholarship 2005 Procedural Incrementalism: A Model for International Bankruptcy John A. E. Pottow University of Michigan Law School, [email protected] Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/articles/619 Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/articles Part of the Bankruptcy Law Commons, Conflict of Laws Commons, Jurisdiction Commons, Legislation Commons, and the Transnational Law Commons Recommended Citation Pottow, John A. E. "Procedural Incrementalism: A Model for International Bankruptcy." Va. J. Int'l L. 45, no. 4 (2005): 935-1015. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articles by an authorized administrator of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Procedural Incrementalism: A Model for International Bankruptcy JOHN A. E. POTTOW* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction ............................................................................... 936 II. The Transnational Insolvency Debate ....................................... 940 A. Insolvency Law Generally ............................................... 940 B. The International Perspective .......................................... 943 C. The Tradition: Territorialism ........................................... 944
    [Show full text]
  • Dimensions of Leadership
    DIMENSIONS OF LEADERSHIP: AN EXPLORATION OF BUSINESS AND FINANCIAL LEADERSHIP; LEADERSHIP WITHIN STATE AND INTERNATIONAL LAW; LEADERSHIP WITHIN GLOBAL GOVERNANCE AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS LADY MARGARET HALL, OXFORD I offer you my warmest greetings to Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford. I am delighted that you can join us for this course entitled Dimensions of Leadership. The University of Oxford has a distinctive collegiate formation, an arrangement within only a few universities worldwide. The colleges which make up Oxford University are self-governing institutions which are both academic and social communities for our undergraduates and graduates. We extend a generous welcome to all of our guests from Xi’an Jiaotong University and hope that you will think of LMH as your home for the next three weeks. We are very pleased to be working for the first time with Xi’an Jiaotong University, a university which, like ours, has an impressive reputation globally and whose students will be the leaders of the future. It is due to this global reputation that our academic programme will focus on those aspects of leadership which will increasingly play a vital part in international affairs. Your participation within the programme will result in an increased understanding of what it means to be a leader in the twenty-first century and the issues which will face you, our global leaders of the future. Lady Margaret Hall is one of the most forward-thinking colleges in Oxford. It is a leader in its commitment to social fairness. It was the first college to allow women to enter Oxford University, and is now at the forefront of outreach within the University.
    [Show full text]
  • Oxford Law News Issue 12, Winter 2007/2008 S
    Oxford law news Issue 12, Winter 2007/2008 S p.10 p.17 p.11 Letter from the Dean: The whole world and Oxford p.17 A brilliant law school is a brilliant part of a community. What is Oxford’s community? It seems to be the whole world. 47 of our 93 full-time academics have overseas university degrees. Next year, 15% of our undergraduates and more than 80% of our graduate students will come to us from more than 60 overseas countries. And our students go overseas: for example, more than 120 Oxford graduates are teaching law in more than 70 universities around the world. But isn’t our community England and Wales? Yes. Of 27 courses for our p. 18 BA, each is a course in English law except Roman Law, Jurisprudence, and International Law. Of our 28 graduate courses, 18 are in English law. In the 20th News ................................2 century, the college system gave us a massive core strength in English public law and private law. You should know that with all the flux in law, commerce, Student News ...................8 and education, we are not diluting that strength. We are building it. Mooting ..........................12 So why do people come from all over the world to a law school that is deeply integrated with the community in this particular jurisdiction? English law has Centres ...........................14 been a terrific export success. And the legal profession is changing, so that the large London solicitors’ firms are now worldwide organizations. But the more Honours & Awards ............17 basic reason has to do with our people, and the way we teach.
    [Show full text]