Assumpsit for nonfeasance

J. Baker
{"title":"Assumpsit for nonfeasance","authors":"J. Baker","doi":"10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198258179.003.0049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Among the writs of assumpsit issued in the fourteenth century were some alleging a mere failure to do what was promised (nonfeasance), the harm being economic rather than physical. The cases in this chapter show how the availability of such actions was controversial for nearly a century. Assumpsit for misfeasance had been allowed without dispute, because the misfeasance would have been a tort even without the undertaking. But assumpsit for nonfeasance rested wholly on a contractual agreement and arguably required written evidence of the agreement, if not a different writ (covenant). During the fifteenth century the action was established, after much debate, by deploying the concepts of bargain, reliance, and deceit. It enabled contracts to be enforced although there was no sealed agreement, as was required in the action of covenant. The turning point was Doige’s Case (1442), in which damages were recovered against a defaulting vendor of land.","PeriodicalId":197105,"journal":{"name":"Baker and Milsom Sources of English Legal History","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Baker and Milsom Sources of English Legal History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198258179.003.0049","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Among the writs of assumpsit issued in the fourteenth century were some alleging a mere failure to do what was promised (nonfeasance), the harm being economic rather than physical. The cases in this chapter show how the availability of such actions was controversial for nearly a century. Assumpsit for misfeasance had been allowed without dispute, because the misfeasance would have been a tort even without the undertaking. But assumpsit for nonfeasance rested wholly on a contractual agreement and arguably required written evidence of the agreement, if not a different writ (covenant). During the fifteenth century the action was established, after much debate, by deploying the concepts of bargain, reliance, and deceit. It enabled contracts to be enforced although there was no sealed agreement, as was required in the action of covenant. The turning point was Doige’s Case (1442), in which damages were recovered against a defaulting vendor of land.
假设不作为
在14世纪发布的假设令状中,有一些声称仅仅是未能履行承诺(不作为),损害是经济上的而不是物质上的。本章中的案例表明,近一个世纪以来,此类诉讼的可获得性是如何引起争议的。假设不当行为被允许没有争议,因为即使没有承诺,不当行为也会构成侵权行为。但假设不作为完全基于合同协议,并且可以说需要该协议的书面证据,如果不是另一份令状(契约)。在15世纪,经过多次辩论,通过部署讨价还价、信赖和欺骗的概念,该诉讼得以确立。它使契约得以执行,尽管没有象盟约行动所要求的那样加盖印章的协议。转折点是多伊格案(1442),在该案中,违约的土地卖主获得了赔偿。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信